Talk:Archive:Grand Unified Micronational

Next events' Agenda
Please feel free to add things you wish to be discusssed about all events here. --Cajak 10:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

GUM LEADERSHIP AND COUNCIL NOMINATIONS OCTOBER 2009
Voting will last until October 10th. On October 12th the winners will succeed the current incumbents. To vote for a candidate please sign your name with three tildes.

Please put all new names below existing ones, not in alphabetical order.

Voting can be done privately by choice by emailing your votes to the chairman. [mailto:government_francisville@yahoo.co.uk]

Robert Lethler

 * Kaiser Wilhelm I
 * Ben Lawson
 * Petrus Máximus I of Finismund

Jacob Tierney

 * Alexander Reinhardt
 * Joe Foxon

Alexander Reinhardt

 * Pres. Kalvin Koolidge
 * Niels I of Flandrensis

Emperor Malum I

 * Robert Lethler

Kalvin Koolidge

 * Alexander Reinhardt
 * Joe Foxon
 * Niels I of Flandrensis

Emperor Wilhelm I

 * Pres. Kalvin Koolidge
 * Ben Lawson
 * Robert Lethler

Jamie Sutherland

 * Pres. Kalvin Koolidge
 * Alexander Reinhardt
 * Ben Lawson
 * Robert Lethler
 * Niels I of Flandrensis

Chief Notary
''Proposing Guillaume Soergel as Chief Notary. He attends meetings most of the times. --Cajak 15:30, October 6, 2009 (UTC)" ?


 * Thank you, I must apologize for not being present lately due to technical difficulties with my laptop. --Parlum Payum Populum et Guillaume Sœrgèl 01:07, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Democratic People's Republic of Erusia

 * Pres. Kalvin Koolidge
 * Ben Lawson

Socialist Republic of Murrayfield

 * Robert Lethler

Federal Republic of St.Charlie

 * Joe Foxon

New Scientopia

 * Alexander Reinhardt

Ohio Empire

 * Kaiser Wilhelm I

Democratic Duchy of Francisville

 * Pres. Kalvin Koolidge
 * Alexander Reinhardt
 * Robert Lethler
 * Joe Foxon
 * Ben Lawson

VOTING RESULTS
These are the total results of the voting from both public and private ballots. This will be continually updated until voting closes. This section is to be edited by the Chairman only.

Chairman

 * Robert Lethler 0
 * Jacob Tierney 1
 * Alexander Reinhardt 2
 * Emperor Malum I 0

Vice Chairman

 * Kalvin Koolidge 2
 * Ben Lawson 0
 * Emperor Wilhelm I 1

Supreme Judge

 * Jamie Sutherland 3 (only candidate)

Cheif Notary
To be confirmed

Advancement Council

 * Erusia 1
 * St.Charlie 1
 * Murrayfield 0
 * New Scientopia 1

Security Council

 * Ohio Empire 1
 * Francisville 2

Barrington Trial
I have opened procedings: click here.

Article on the Observer criticising Erusia's internal affairs
Following the article published on the Observer the 17th of September, I received obvoisly a leter of complaints from the Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Erusia, saying that several people wrote to them protesting about the article.

I please ask you to stop doing this. The article is, if you all noticed, a letter sent by an anonymous Erusian legislator, that I, and Director Magnus De Armis indeed allowed to publish. In the next days, someone from Erusia will write us a letter explaining the issue, and we will do the same to it. Therefore, if you're really open-minded people, you will read both versions.

Robert said something true that I should have done: "report Erusia about this first", and I will eventually follow this example if something else like this happens. Again, wait for the Erusian Government's reply before accusing people.

Yours, --Cajak 15:56, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

Open letter to members
To whom it may concern, I read yesterday the message saying that I’m no longer the Vice Chairman of GUM, and since I was somehow aware that the article I allowed to publish would have caused something in the Quorum, I still accept the decision and look forward to vote for the person that will succeed me. However, there is only one thing that I was unfortunately disappointed of during these days: the fact that this sudden process in which I was directly involved, since I was the Vice Chairman until a few hours ago, was entirely done while I was absent. I am not criticising the decision of the Quorum of Delegates, but instead, the fact that I was not able to defend myself in something which was extremely controversial in the past days, also inside the micronation that I rule. I assume then that the only person that the Quorum listened to for deciding how to vote, was the same person that declared yesterday that I’m now an enemy of its State ! I am not a super-politician, nor I worked as a barrister while living in London, but I do recognise when a voting is impartial, and this unfortunately was one. I do not have negative feelings towards any person that participated in the vote either, since they in fact did their job although they were not able to listen to my version which I believe, had some importance too. I don’t have negative feelings towards Mr.Robert Lethler either, that asked for this vote of no-confidence, since Lethler did what his Government or superiors asked him to do. Therefore, resuming, what I’m only disappointed of is that such an important thing like this vote was done when I wasn’t even at the meeting.

Again, I didn’t attend because I was having fun somewhere else: I had the “amazing pleasure” to attend a funeral this weekend (also of a person that I loved a lot), and I came back to Parma Sunday afternoon, which means that I have once more, very limited internet.

Concluding, I’m just hoping not to see events like these occur anymore. I’d like to remind the Quorum, that when other events that needed the presence of all concerned micronations took place, they were always and ONLY done when ALL involved micronations were at the meeting (at least we asked them to come and found an appropriate date for everyone). I’ve always attended a meeting when possible, and I asked even to post-pone the vote, but this was not possible, apparently. I just hope I’ll be able to vote for my successor.

Yours, Alexander Reinhardt OBS --Cajak 19:58, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

p.s Feel free to reply to this message as you wish

Erusian Reply
Firstly, I would like to personally note that it has been made clear to the Chairman that had we been aware of the familial situation of the Prime Minister, I would not have brought the motion forward and instead would have persuaded my government to settle for a motion for official condemnation by the Quorum as opposed to a Vote of No Confidence. I would like to personally apologise for any further stress or difficulty this may have caused Mr Reinhardt at this time and would like to assure him that we did not intend to make your personal situation any worse. I truly sympathise with the Prime Minister and thank him for his understanding that once the motion had gone forward it was not within my power to over-ride the authority of our collective leadership. Once again, I do personally and deeply apologise.

I must note however that, if I have understood you correctly, it is definitely not fair to accuse me of branding you an enemy of the Erusian State. all three members of the Communist Party's Politburo Standing Committee, myself included, voted against the motion to declare Mr Reinhardt an Enemy of the State - unfortunately, the authority of the Central Committee over-rides that of the Politubro Standing Committee. I would like to say that next week I will personally be appealing against the decision to the Central Discipline Commission. I must however emphasise that this decision was taken democratically and not unilaterally (though it is the responsibility of Comrade Maisano to make the official decision once he has approval), by three elected organs of the Communist Party, and so I would like to say now to everyone - before the inevitable condemnations come pouring in - that any criticism of the decision would be nothing short of hypocritical.

Having said that, I am afraid that - speaking as the representative of Erusia now - I must completely reject the rest of Mr Reinhardt's comments on the issue. A St.Charlian delegation was invited to attend the meeting when the vote was proposed but the government failed twice consecutively to dispatch an Ambassador to the Quorum. The Federal Government was notified by the GUM that a Vote of No Confidence had been put to the Quorum by myself on behalf of the Central People's Government on September 20th. Mr Reinhardt and his government were more than capable of publishing their side of the story for the community to see on MicroWiki or their official forum, offering adequate defence and allowing time for questioning. My government was not prepared to post-pone the vote and so pushed brought it forward on the September 20th Quorum, despite pressure from Mr Sutherland for him to do so - I remind you that it is the constitutional right of a nation to bring forward a motion and that no-one can prevent them from doing so. Nonetheless, it is to my understanding that Mr Sutherland would have gladly kept the vote open for an extra 7 days if not more to allow Mr Reinhardt adequate time to defend himself - he did not take this opportunity once during the seven day period, nor did the St.Charlian government make any effort to do so on his behalf given his personal situation.

As such, I must condemn the Right Honourable Prime Minister's accusation that this vote was not impartial. All five members who voted did so without any outside pressure from either side in this dispute and cast their votes according to either their own consience or the collective consience of the government agencies they represent. His government was given plenty of time to make a statement asking for a voting extension, or to post a defence statement on your behalf, but did not seize this opportunity and did not dispatch an Ambassador to either Quorum meeting where the vote was being discussed. I would also like to remind delegates to the Quorum that even if the Observer did later offer us the opportunity to write a formal response to the accusations it printed, Erusia was not given the chance to defend itself when slanderous lies were printed in the newspaper responsible for this issue - we were only offered such after the article was printed. It is the opinion of my government that we were very generous in warning St.Charlie in advance of the motion and offering them a chance to defend their Vice-Chairman. I must also note, even with the deepest respect for him, that Mr Reinhardt quite happily disregarded our laws and so should not criticise us or anyone else for going against GUM conventions. Erusia has treated him much better than he treated us, and I ask everyone to remember that. - Robert Lethler

Re:
First of all I'm glad you understood what I meant. I actually expressed myself badly: I'm not using the funeral or the past events to justify my absence, as it's the current internet that is the real problem that I have. Nevertheless, don't worry if your motion will be rejected: I accept the decision of Mr.Maisano. If he believes I'm an enemy of Erusia, he's got the right to think it. Of course it's not really an award, but I'm not whining about it.

Now, I myself gave authorization to Mr.James Lunam to attend meetings as a full representative of St.Charlie while I was away. He, however, as he told me on the same evening, couldn't have attended the meeting because he was already busy. I do not have the power, and the will, to deny him a dinner with friends. Mr.Lunam also told me he wrote a message on the talk page saying he wouldn't have attended, but it was apparently deleted by your editor, that commented it with a "joke has gone too far". I'm happy he referred to me as Mr.Reinhardt, but the joke he maybe meant, included also my place as Vice Chairman in this organization that I saw growing up and helped to develop.

Furthermore, I was not aware of the fact that I could have asked for a seven day period in which member states could have voted. The only voting that appeared on this talk page was, if I remember correctly, for the membership of Qootarlaent. I expected to find an appropriate date for speaking to the Quorum of Delegates about the past situation for several reasons: first of all, I like to speak directly to people, and the chatroom was the perfect place. Secondly, we always did it like this since January. Even during the New Euro-Erusian war, or the debate that saw you and the King of Erusia speaking to us at a meeting, we always looked for an appropriate date and found an alternative if someone was missing (I don't remember now, maybe once when Wilhelm didn't come to the meeting, not even one of his colleagues). What was the actual need of the Erusian Government to vote for this "as soon as possible" ?

I didn't ask publically for an extention because I assumed someone would have understood, or that someone would have said "oh wait, that guy can't come" after reading some of my last posts (nevertheless, I'm not complaining about this, it wouldn't have changed points of view). Erusia was not given the chance to defend itself because usually, when an article is published, replies arrive later. For instance: when an article criticizing Berlusconi is published, Berlusconi himself is never (or at least it's what they tell us, heh) informed of the content of the article. Later, he decides whether to write back to the newspaper, or just ignore the statements. I, like you, wouldn't have ignored them, but rather, I would have written a reply, as you did.

Now, before going to sleep, I'm honoured by the fact that Erusia was more "loose" on this, but I still ask myself what was the need to vote for this no confidence as soon as possible. Yes, all nations can ask for a vote and demand for it to be voted on the first meeting that we have, but if Erusia published an article slandering St.Charlie, and you weren't able, in any way, to attend meetings for votes of no confidence directed against your place as Supreme Judge, I would have waited for you to come back to activity, that's "fo' sho'", not even if my government was asking me your failure and decadence in Croatian or if the GUM Constitution was giving me the opportunity to send you to Alcatraz and sell your house on eBay. It's just a question of respect. Not because laws give you permission, that they must be used ASAP. I'm not saying they don't have to be respected, but that if someone is incapacited, like how I am now, things must be handled in a different way. --Cajak 21:56, September 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, I feel compelled to remind you that there is no King of Erusia - there is a former King. You would do very well to remember that unless you want to aggrevate this issue further - to imply the Erusian monarchy is in any way legitemate would be a serious political error.


 * Having established that point, I also feel compelled to remind you that when Berlusconi is criticsed, Angela Merkel doesn't stand on street corners handing out the newspaper criticising him. It is not the fact that the Observer ran this story that makes it unacceptable - it is the fact that you, the Prime Minister and former Vice-Chairman of the GUM, personally endorsed and distributed it. And do not deny your personal endorsement - I am well aware of what was said between you and Mr Pierson thanks to our internal police inquiry. You did not respect our laws, you did not respect our nation and you did not respect the authority of the Central People's Government over its own citizens. Mr Pierson is a terrorist and a counter-revolutionary in the eyes of our government, not simply because of this e-mail but because of his involvement in an attempt to cripple our communications system and overthrow our elected government.


 * I suggest you stop arguing before our government decides to petition GUM to bring you to trial - we are being very lenient and accepting here, Mr Reinhardt, and we do not appreciate the attitude you continue to display towards us.

Letter to all members of the Grand Unified Micronational
Statement regarded as informal by the National Congress of Sandus;

Cherum Amicumi Micropayusi: «Dear Friends of [Allied] Micronations:»

I would like regret that I have not been able to attend regular sessions of the Council of Delegates. Too, though this now does not effect me, school has been very difficult for me to get onto my back up personal desktop computer. As I have stated before, there was a technical problem with my laptop and I expect it back in a week from the P.R.C.

I understand that despite these misfortunes, that work must continue. I understand that these misfortunes do not exempt me from my duty to my nation and to this union, and I will take this weekend to return to my work schedule and "get caught up" on discussions and events within the G.U.M.

I look forward to returning to work and I hope I can meet with the active member states to discuss the "happenings" in your nations, our union and certain events.

Issued from the Offices of the National Congress, 'Speaker of the House's Bureau.'' Parlum Payum Populum et Guillaume Sœrgèl 01:23, October 10, 2009 (UTC)