Dividend Appeals! [updated]
Day 1,612, 17:30
•
Published in Ireland 
•
by
•
by Sweet Drinker
So most are aware I recently released an article entitled Dividends.
If you haven't read that, and your Irish, I suggest you get on that
😉
When I created this program I had a single rule for eligibility, with a few exemptions.
You must have held Irish Citizenship for the last 2 months to be eligible.
Unless;
A Irish Bootcamp Graduate,
or
Your Irish Citizenship has been sacrificed for the production benefit of an Irish National Military Uniy,
or
Your Irish Citizenship has been sacrificed as part of our Ambassador program.
And being the fool I am, I thought this was black&white and determining eligibility would be a simple numbres game (I'm good at numbres games)
But instead I've found all shades of grey while looking over the applicants.
It's not just a numbres game, it's a social game (I'm not so good at those..)
Here is the applicant sheet so far (it will be added to for the duration of the Dividends article remaining in the media. At which point we will discontinue taking applications)
2mnth CS? (has been a citizen of eIreland for the past 2 months)
Boot Grad? (Is a graduate of eIrish BootCamp)
NMU hub (National Military Unit Foreign Production Hub)
Ambass? (Irish Ambassador to another nation)
>0=eligible [the maroon column] (If the total of the previous 4 columns is atleast one, candidate is eligible)
Well first off: so much for my job security! My boss our CP isn't eligible. He recently had a brief propoganda tour in Britain. So when you scroll through the last 2months of Irish Immigrants... there he is.
I don't know how you feel about that.
I must say he took the news pretty well.
I've marked some other names on here as Case Study. They are not necessarily unique cases. But they define questions/concerns I have.
I've set out rules for this program. And will adhere to the letter of those rules. But I'm giving ppl the opportunity to appeal due to circumstance, and let the community itself discuss if the letter of the laws isn't parrallel to the spirit of laws.
Case Study MUFC92:
Mufc currently has Croatian citizenship.
None of the exceptions apply to his case either: not a BootCamp grad, doesn't hold production bonuses for an Irish National MU, to my knowledge is not ambassador to Croatia.
But saying he is not Irish is abit 'grey'. He's our Minister of Defense!
He's been a member of our community for quite some time.
How do you feel about applicants such as this
Case Study Yddub Emwolb:
Currently has Indian Citizenship.
None of the exceptions apply... or is Yddub's work in India qualify as Ambassador work? I've no doubt his presence will do nothing but good for eIreland's reputation in eIndia. Yddub is the Irish Gentleman.
I won't lie: having seen some of the contribution Yddub makes to eIreland without any interest in recognition for it... this one is close to my heart.
It's unlikely eIreland could ever pay back all that he has done for the community.
Case Study Einberliner:
Einie's case represents that of several applicants (and potential applicants): ppl who once had Irish citizenship, but have been gone (some like Eini for a long time) and now have Irish citizenship.
As much as I
❤Donut, the ideal behind this program was to reward the ppl who have weathered the hard times here in eIreland, and I'm of the opinion that those who have only recently returned are not eligible. At the same time I know this seems harsh and the community may feel differently about the ruling.
(and incidently, if Einie's case is overturned, a precedent is set. IrishBhoy's situation is the same. So my neck my be off the chopping block lol. Numerous potential candidates applications are currently declined under the same ruling.)
Case Study Sakha:
Sakha is a new citizen and active BootCamp member (but not a graduate)
Sakha will not make the 2 month requirement simply by not being old enough.
Not old enough by ONE DAY...
Rules are rules, but are we really that damn mean? To an active new citizen no less?
I'd feel pretty $hit about turning this one down..
I'm not perfect. I may have misjudged a factor in your application.
If the above document has u listed as declined, and you feel there is an error in my information, then appeal the particulars of your case in the comments below. We will as a community review your case and decide if you are infact eligible.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
There needs to be rules for it.
I'm fine with not getting the dividend as I have not held Irish CS for more than 2 months, and that is part of the rules.
I'm Irish ;_;
Though the "Not old enough by ONE DAY" case can surely be allowed to pass lol
Indeed IB there needs to be rules, but we should always make sure the rules we choose to live by run parallel to our goals.
Sakha's divdend decline is above all other cases a crime imo!
I don't think the Irish Community will be willing to accept an active NC's application being declined over a single day.
I'm fine with not getting one either, even though I've been with Irish Citizenship for a very long time prior to this, etc. etc. I can always scam people on the Money Market anyway, this should be for the most needy, imo.
Yddub was taken by force; he should get it 😛
CP should have override authority to make exceptions.
damn this is what happens when i listen to MUFC92 and told to keep quiet about it, you still know that I havent had CS for 2 months.
According to the rules I should be eligible
I think Ian E Coleman's should have a 1 in the eligible column
And I'm not on the list 🙁
you don't like rules, i don't like rules - lets change it. Have a citizenship? Have 1 point. 2 times elected as congressman if eIreland? Got 2 points. Done something exceptional good? Take 1 point because you sacrificed your interests to the national good. As much every simple citizen will be rewarded for simple moves he does - more motivation he will receive to continue. In other words: government loves citizens - citizens loves government.
I support breaking the rules for MUFC, Ydub, eine & Sakka
& for IBhoy
Yes Louise, yours is a typo
Ian Coleman should be listed eigible too
Looks to me like there is an error in the maroon column from 34 to 40 it does not seem to pick up the first column including mine except for Ming Jr
I haven't left ireland for over an year.
Myself and a lot of other people who commented on the original article aren't on that list:
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/dividends1-2011637/2/20#comments
Rules should be adhered to in the initial phase of the programme.
And (as you have done) an appeal process should be in place.
I have no problem with the Minister relaxing the rules in certain circumstances.
So if I was Minister I would allow Sakha as to not allow for one day is just mean.
MUFC is different, He as a Minister (suppose it is the same for IBhoy also) and should be seen to adhere to the rules.
But as I said the initial response for the Minister should, imho,be to refuse those who don't qualify and offer them the opportunity to appeal. In their appeal the candidate should detail why an exception should be made
the Minister then ld make a judgment call..
Actually I never used the word in first article so I didn't really apply. I just did some whining for my own amusement.
Jeeez Sweets, too honest for ya own good lol
Also if Sakha isnt getting it, he can have mine.
Screw the rules. Give the cash to anyone who is in essence Irish.
when will we get dividend ?
I guess I'm in the same category as Einie and IBhoy... xD
Just in case anyone misunderstands me my suggestion takes into account the rules set by sweet. The logic of the rules are for sweet to justify.
I recommend that you form a committee to discuss the rules. That committee, having reached a quorum of 2/3 of it's members, may then elect a sub committee, the members of which shall be vetted by a regulatory authority (from which the members can be appointed by the Good Ethics Council, to be formed of people who couldn't get on the first committee). When the sub-committee has been formed, they can then appoint a commission to commission a report on whether the rules are fair or not. When this report is compiled, the measures it proposes can then be appealed to the Sub-Committee Commission Report Authority, whose judgement must take into account the Supreme Court's view of the constitution. Eventually, one of the rules will be found to be in breach of another rule, and the whole committee process will have to start over. In the meantime, a general election will have ensured that there is a different government, who rejected the notion of the initial Committee, and then will have to form their own Committee, to report on the report that was given by the Commission of the Sub Committee of the Rules Committee. All in all,many years will be pass, no money will have been given out, and we will all be paying water charges in a country that is flooded. That, my friends, is democracy, and that is how this problem should be dealt with.
[removed]
Yay!! I'm on the list when will the money be in
Rules are there for a reason but as in any good organization there should be a means for an executive override for any cases that don't fit the rules or parameters. One day should not disqualify anyone. There are also certain players who are long time members of our family of citizens who should not be denied if they ask. Some people have earned the right to be "Irish" even if they are currently not or have just returned.
I see the update list has those around me now corrected but not myself, at the risk of being sacrilegous, which would hardly do for a son of Eriu: My Lord how have I offended thee? ..
I recommend that you form a committee to discuss the rules. That committee, having reached a quorum of 2/3 of it's members, may then elect a sub committee, the members of which shall be vetted by a regulatory authority (from which the members can be appointed by the Good Ethics Council, to be formed of people who couldn't get on the first committee). When the sub-committee has been formed, they can then appoint a commission to commission a report on whether the rules are fair or not. When this report is compiled, the measures it proposes can then be appealed to the Sub-Committee Commission Report Authority, whose judgement must take into account the Supreme Court's view of the constitution. Eventually, one of the rules will be found to be in breach of another rule, and the whole committee process will have to start over. In the meantime, a general election will have ensured that there is a different government, who rejected the notion of the initial Committee, and then will have to form their own Committee, to report on the report that was given by the Commission of the Sub Committee of the Rules Committee. All in all,many years will be pass, no money will have been given out, and we will all be paying water charges in a country that is flooded. That, my friends, is democracy, and that is how this problem should be dealt with.
x2
Well Martin, I missed updating you status on the document and cba to fix it/upload it/ edit article.
I really need to stop writing articles after midnight, they always have gremlins >_
But since you aske😛 your lack of an awesome avatar does offend me slightly.
Please sort that out!
I think the newbie in the boot camp should get it and the rest of us that like to wander around the eWorld and do not currently meet the requirements should not...
@Moonbeam~ I don't know if you read this mans opinion but...
I recommend that you form a committee to discuss the rules. That committee, having reached a quorum of 2/3 of it's members, may then elect a sub committee, the members of which shall be vetted by a regulatory authority (from which the members can be appointed by the Good Ethics Council, to be formed of people who couldn't get on the first committee). When the sub-committee has been formed, they can then appoint a commission to commission a report on whether the rules are fair or not. When this report is compiled, the measures it proposes can then be appealed to the Sub-Committee Commission Report Authority, whose judgement must take into account the Supreme Court's view of the constitution. Eventually, one of the rules will be found to be in breach of another rule, and the whole committee process will have to start over. In the meantime, a general election will have ensured that there is a different government, who rejected the notion of the initial Committee, and then will have to form their own Committee, to report on the report that was given by the Commission of the Sub Committee of the Rules Committee. All in all,many years will be pass, no money will have been given out, and we will all be paying water charges in a country that is flooded. That, my friends, is democracy, and that is how this problem should be dealt with.
It is too long to read Yddub... I tried to read it twice now and I just get distracted... Comments should be short... Sum it up for me would ya??? 😉
Ok Moonie. Let me edit out what Digits didn't need to add.
I recommend that you form a committee to discuss the rules. That committee, having reached a quorum of 2/3 of it's members, may then elect a sub committee, the members of which shall be vetted by a regulatory authority (from which the members can be appointed by the Good Ethics Council, to be formed of people who couldn't get on the first committee). When the sub-committee has been formed, they can then appoint a commission to commission a report on whether the rules are fair or not. When this report is compiled, the measures it proposes can then be appealed to the Sub-Committee Commission Report Authority, whose judgement must take into account the Supreme Court's view of the constitution. Eventually, one of the rules will be found to be in breach of another rule, and the whole committee process will have to start over. In the meantime, a general election will have ensured that there is a different government, who rejected the notion of the initial Committee, and then will have to form their own Committee, to report on the report that was given by the Commission of the Sub Committee of the Rules Committee. All in all,many years will be pass, no money will have been given out, and we will all be paying water charges in a country that is flooded. That, my friends, is democracy, and that is how this problem should be dealt with.
Hope that helps.
Rules sucks, bureaucrats sucks
"Comments should be short"
@Digits & Yddub. That's easy for you to say. Especially Yddub.
I'm not on the list and I commented on the last article.