I don't do anything as the leader of the militia does nothing. I, personally, find recent actions by our militia to be illegal. But I digress and wait for new leadership.
wonders what the cit-sarge does
The Citizen-Sergeant shall delineate rank and responsibility within the Militia.
Maybe what you consider norm which isn't described in law ought to be described in law, because it isn't so, it's not "no legal issue there", it's just the absence of law.?
"explicitly" allowing the citizen in charge of militia to do whatever he wants doesn't seem like a good excuse for a law, what it actually does is: all those high ranks in militia can do whatever they want, low ranks apparently cant. That issue is worth discussing.
I've stated my grievances. I expected more transparency. I misunderstood the status quo. I am sorry.I do not understand.
When the Grey Wardens, including our own Citizen Cormac, asked the Taijitu Militia for assistance in giving this region a taste of its own medicine, Corporal Eluvatar and Lancepesade Pauline Bonaparte were happy to oblige, with Citizen-Sergeant Funkadelia’s permission.
Maybe what you consider norm which isn't described in law ought to be described in law, because it isn't so, it's not "no legal issue there", it's just the absence of law.
The Citizen-Sergeant shall delineate rank and responsibility within the Militia.
"explicitly" allowing the citizen in charge of militia to do whatever he wants doesn't seem like a good excuse for a law, what it actually does is: all those high ranks in militia can do whatever they want, low ranks apparently cant. That issue is worth discussing.
As stated above, we clearly agreed as a region that the Citizen-Sergeant should be able to command the militia. If you wished to require the Citizen-Sergeant's presence in IRC and in the mission itself, why didn't you bring this up during debate?
And if you have a problem with military ranks (which only exist to give some people power to command others), again: why did you not bring this up during the debate period?
I don't think I can stress enough that the Militia cannot function without leaders. We have to give these leaders the ability to do something without a week-long Ecclesiastical process, otherwise the Militia is an incoherent mess.
As stated above, we clearly agreed as a region that the Citizen-Sergeant should be able to command the militia. If you wished to require the Citizen-Sergeant's presence in IRC and in the mission itself, why didn't you bring this up during debate?
And if you have a problem with military ranks (which only exist to give some people power to command others), again: why did you not bring this up during the debate period?
Are you feeling that you should have had the opportunity during the debate to discuss this issue? Maybe you misread something I wrote back then ;) I brought it up plenty of times.
I do not understand.
Your stated grievance was that the Citizen-Sergeant had not ordered the operation. This has been shown to be false. The Citizen-Sergeant told me to go ahead with the plan presented to him.
What transparency were you expecting that you're not getting?
QuoteI do not understand.
Your stated grievance was that the Citizen-Sergeant had not ordered the operation. This has been shown to be false. The Citizen-Sergeant told me to go ahead with the plan presented to him.
What transparency were you expecting that you're not getting?
I think you misunderstood me. I am trying to say that I said my piece, why I said it, acknowledged my error, and apologized for it.
As stated above, we clearly agreed as a region that the Citizen-Sergeant should be able to command the militia. If you wished to require the Citizen-Sergeant's presence in IRC and in the mission itself, why didn't you bring this up during debate?
And if you have a problem with military ranks (which only exist to give some people power to command others), again: why did you not bring this up during the debate period?
Are you feeling that you should have had the opportunity during the debate to discuss this issue? Maybe you misread something I wrote back then ;) I brought it up plenty of times.
As stated above, we clearly agreed as a region that the Citizen-Sergeant should be able to command the militia. If you wished to require the Citizen-Sergeant's presence in IRC and in the mission itself, why didn't you bring this up during debate?
And if you have a problem with military ranks (which only exist to give some people power to command others), again: why did you not bring this up during the debate period?
Are you feeling that you should have had the opportunity during the debate to discuss this issue? Maybe you misread something I wrote back then ;) I brought it up plenty of times.
I just read through the original debate (http://forum.taijitu.org/proposals-and-discussions/citizens%27-militia/) and you never made any comment regarding military ranks or the ability of the Citizen-Sergeant to delegate authority. You argued that the Citizen-Sergeant should not have authority in the first place to authorize operations themselves, but that position was voted down and was not the position Bustos advanced.
As stated above, we clearly agreed as a region that the Citizen-Sergeant should be able to command the militia. If you wished to require the Citizen-Sergeant's presence in IRC and in the mission itself, why didn't you bring this up during debate?
And if you have a problem with military ranks (which only exist to give some people power to command others), again: why did you not bring this up during the debate period?
Are you feeling that you should have had the opportunity during the debate to discuss this issue? Maybe you misread something I wrote back then ;) I brought it up plenty of times.
I just read through the original debate (http://forum.taijitu.org/proposals-and-discussions/citizens%27-militia/) and you never made any comment regarding military ranks or the ability of the Citizen-Sergeant to delegate authority. You argued that the Citizen-Sergeant should not have authority in the first place to authorize operations themselves, but that position was voted down and was not the position Bustos advanced.
Maybe, I did say a syndicalized militia, or a completely ad hoc organization, either one is opposite to established military hierarchy which I clearly opposed from the beginning.
And if I do not have the freedom to express what I believe on this issues then I doubt you can call all this "democratic". I have an issue now about how things are being conducted, why can't I talk about it? Dictatorship of a majority? I really doubt you believe that, if you feel things passed in the past cannot be questioned then we're in complete disagreement. Proposals come from any form of consensus, right now I see none, I'm don't see anybody representing what I believe in.
I also have the freedom to point out the fact that you complain, complain, complain constantly but never offer constructive input.
I also have the freedom to point out the fact that you complain, complain, complain constantly but never offer constructive input.
This is a clear evidence we need couples' counseling. Prejudicial exaggeration is wrong. So many times I've offered constructive input, so many bills resulted from my constructive input, it's really unfair the way you put it, just because you disagree with me.
blatant prejudice
I am no good at writing laws but I definitely heavily contributed to many laws in place, including the Militia, which was to be "Taijitu Grand Navy" until I suggested the Militia. complain complain complain constantly it blatant prejudice.
Disregarding my proposals are "complaints" is prejudice to me.
Proposals come from any form of consensus, right now I see none, I'm don't see anybody representing what I believe in.This extends to this thread. My first stance is that no wrong was done because nothing says he can't do it, but there is no clear chain-of-command or hierarchy even implicit on the current law, so all this is just what you interpret from what is written.
It's not an alternative I agree with, and it's one the region did not vote for, but the alternative of not having a Citizen-Sergeant lead the Militia is an actual alternative to the adopted legislation.Citizen-sergeant elections (http://forum.taijitu.org/officer-elections/gaiose-ar-1-citizen-sergeant-elections-voting/) doesn't have that option.
It's not an alternative I agree with, and it's one the region did not vote for, but the alternative of not having a Citizen-Sergeant lead the Militia is an actual alternative to the adopted legislation.Citizen-sergeant elections (http://forum.taijitu.org/officer-elections/gaiose-ar-1-citizen-sergeant-elections-voting/) doesn't have that option.
Maybe we're just not exploring many options and we'd benefit on any kind of debate on any kind of thread...just like this one.
Well I did sayThere is:QuoteProposals come from any form of consensus, right now I see none, I'm don't see anybody representing what I believe in.This extends to this thread. My first stance is that no wrong was done because nothing says he can't do it, but there is no clear chain-of-command or hierarchy even implicit on the current law, so all this is just what you interpret from what is written.
III.1. The Citizen-Sergeant shall delineate rank and responsibility within the Militia.
"He has the right to delegate" doesn't mean he can create hierarchy, it doesn't have to, and imo, it shouldn't. We all know there is a structured group running the militia justified by "hierarchy", which could as well be a Cabal (lol), that is fine we know "leaders are amazing" and all, it just doesn't have to be that way, even if the law in place.Google says "cabal" is "a secret political clique or faction." I really, really, really don't think the several noncommissioned officers of the Taijitu Citizens' Militia, their rank being public information, count. I wouldn't describe us as a political clique or faction either, honestly. While most of us are part of the "Sovereigntist" political faction, it is a larger one than just us from what I've seen, and is more of a political philosophy than an organized political faction IMO.
The same goes for attacking Bustos for not "following orders", there is really no law against...not following orders, or impeding militia members from participating on other operations, or them to form their own militias.
I don't question the legality, I question the interpretation. I'm not criticizing the current Citizen-sergeant nor the operations...at least not in this thread. Yes I'd rather a more ad hoc approach, less "law" might not be a bad thing.
There is:Yes, he can say Bustos is a toilet scrubber and he has to scrub toilets. This is as valid as the current interpretation, but I could see from the beginning that under the operations promoted by people now "leading" the militia it meant traditional military hierarchy. That's fine, but I think as a revolutionary value of equality and all that, maybe we shouldn't make a "toilet scrubber" title and force them to toilet scrub, if you know what I mean. That law also gives him the ability to abolish ranks and remove responsibilities, any elected Citizen-Sergeant can do that, if that's acceptable then maybe we should do that next time.Quote from: Militia ActIII.1. The Citizen-Sergeant shall delineate rank and responsibility within the Militia.
I'm not sure what you're talking about here. The ranks in the Militia are explicitly provided for, and have been determined in a manner so as to be congruent with the ideas of the glorious revolution: we are all soldiers in the army, none of us commissioned officers. We generally discuss militia matters informally, and explain what we're doing and why.None of what you described requires ranks, we generally discuss militia matters informally and people justify them regardless of ranks, that is a good approach, very like what I proposed as a "Syndicalized" or "ad hoc" militia. If people can see the merit in those proposals I will certainly support or write an amendment.
The actual discussion started about an instance of delegation. If you think delegation is fine, then it doesn't matter if the person delegated to is an NCO or not: the Citizen-Sergeant can delegate running a particular operation to them.I think the Delegation under the current law is fine, I said so. I dislike the ranks and the sometimes autocracy on deciding the operations. Yes the current law gives the Citizen-sergeant the power to decide those things, I just think sometimes we, the militia, do operations for the slightest of reasons. Maybe the above mentioned discussion should be mandatory even if only within the militia in IRC. Maybe even a simple vote within IRC would totally satisfy me and make me say I'm proud for the "work" we're doing. (I've said I'm proud before, didn't I?)
On the other hand no we don't have a law making disobeying a crime. Why should we? We have decided to move away from that sort of thing. Bustos got called out for his refusal to move, this started a discussion, and ultimately Bustos agreed the instruction was legitimate and moved. At no point did anyone do something illegal.ipsis verbis, I just took this opportunity to discuss underlying matters brought up from Bustos' discussion. How highjacker of me, sorry.
Okay, how would you define what's an operation by the Taijitu Citizens' Militia then?I think it should arise on need, as it has been for many of them, organized on the spot and executed by those in favor. Those against may bring the operation in question to, what in our current system would most likely fit, the Ecclesia. In a way, we've been doing that, again there's no need for ranks or "orders", it's just more interpretive of free will if it's organized in a more participative way. Participative Democracy ftw.
This discussion is no longer fruitful. I believe the Militia should form itself organically whenever it is necessary by participation, whoever wants to participate is free to do so and it may have a SIMPLE ad hoc organization, without the need or attempt to establish military governance. Calling it a Citizens' Militia doesn't make it so.
This happened in the past:(...)We shall organize ourselves into a militia until our current Delegate Oz officially recognizes this military operation under the Taijituan Army. We shall declare this intention in Taijitu's RMB, a list of those who join the militia will be updated here and transmitted to officials in Osiris.
(http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/6296/loc8.png)
I sign this declaration of intentions, I join the militia Taijituans for Freedom and Democracy with [INSERT NATION NAME], I will change my flag to the militia flag, move my WA nation to the region Osiris (http://www.nationstates.net/region=osiris) and there endorse Cormac (http://www.nationstates.net/nation=cormac_a_stark).
I think it should arise on need, as it has been for many of them, organized on the spot and executed by those in favor. Those against may bring the operation in question to, what in our current system would most likely fit, the Ecclesia. In a way, we've been doing that, again there's no need for ranks or "orders", it's just more interpretive of free will if it's organized in a more participative way.