Join the new world

I hope that by bringing a summary of these activities to this newspaper is of help and value to you, the US citizen and voter.

Thank you for keeping congress accountable

INSURGIO~

Why would you not just use the org?

try reading it 😛

who reads 'official' articles?

people who don't want to ask stupid questions that are answered in the article? 😛

Good Article...except one error

"IES (Immigration Dept) falls under Congressional purveyance, its Director appointed by the President."

The IES director is elected by congress, without a term limit. IES Directors usually serve until they burnout or congress decides they want to replace them. Maybe you were thinking of the Department of Homeland Security, which is appointed by the President and works closely with IES.

indeed-- thank you, John Largo, I'll do the edit now.

~INSURGIO~~

What is the point of publishing a link to the IES statistics when only 40 people can see it?

sorry, thought it was in a Public section.
I'll see if I can get clearance to paste some of the good parts here.
of all people.. thanks for bringing that to my attention, Ajay/RGR.

After seeing known turncoat Benedict Pfeiffer get approved and the criminal get away with it, I am VERY concerned about all eLaws and eRegulations being followed.

Eh the problem with eRep is there are only so many things you can do.

I think it is pretty impressive what I have done given the circumstances.

If this were a RL battle then some cunning strategy could mean victory, but it's not, it's eRep, so meh.

Lmao, like you had any real interests in the IES procedures.

you're simply attempting to understand why you're getting beat so badly.

protip: it's your personality.

which is, specifically, why this information remains classified.
there ya go, America-- Ajay/RGR is the root cause of your government's inability to be perfectly transparent in the basically simple matter of Immigration statistics, because his twisted genius will find a way to use that information to develop yet another way to fu*k America.

....don't compare my genius with ajay

75/710

voted for Custer

Vote, nice article.

Excellent work, Custer...\0/

Great work Custer, as always!
Voted!

"After much discussion, it was disclosed that IES boss Malarkey83 had approved of the approval, making that whole Discussion moot........This is about procedure, developing rules and/or guidelines to follow consistently, not about any one case in point..."
__________________

Have you concluded that the proceedure was not followed? Isn't that the point which is not moot?

It strains credibility that Proteus was aware IES had approved his actions. He says they didn't. Everyone was pretty much in agreement. Perhaps he should not be sanctioned because of the specific circumstances and that is indeed Congress' decision. But on the point you raise namely consistently following pre-established proceedure, the conclusion seems inescapable: that standard was not met.

All ends well however. Regards

oliver: "strains credibility" or "strains credulity"?

As the IES Director WA unavailable for immediate come on the situation, we were operating on what we did have. Once Malarkey told us that it was in fact approved by him for acceptance, then the question of legality was answered.

Okay so you want to see how credulous I am... not that much. There is a proceedure to be followed by congressmen. In this particular instance it wasn't followed. The applicant may have been approved after the fact, and that makes a lot of sense: no harm was done. What is apparent from the congress posts and review of the relevant list is that the applicant was not on the approved list, that the congressman knew it or was willfully blind to it, that the congressman had not sought any other approval and granted citizenship because he judged it was a reasonable thing to do. If by "legality" you mean that the error led to no harm or that it was cured post facto, we are agreed. However, the Speaker had raised a specific issue: "developing rules and/or guidelines to follow consistently, not about any one case in point..." It wouldn't kill anyone to admit that proceedures are not consistently followed when it comes to our friends - a pretty common phenomenon.

Paul contacted Malarkey via text your and received approval prior to accepting. So procedure was followed but the rest of Congress didn't have the whole picture.

I can't find it in me to disrespect and insult Paul Proteus by believing he received approval before the fact. If he had received approval, he is not the kind of person who would mock other players by keeping it a secret and watching from the sidelines as the debate went on for pages, right to a vote on censure. He is not the kind of player who would mislead in his own posts, the ones where he admitted his error and said nothing about receiving approval. Or am I mistaken, as often I am?

No use trying to establish proceedures if players are going to buy this kind of buloney: there will always be an explanation, and it will always be accepted, no matter its merit. I prefer Paul's initial honesty: I didn't follow the proceedure 'cause its a game and it was the right thing to do.

Paul admitted that Malarkey's response wasn't completely clear, but his interpretation was that it was approved, and he went with it to avoid waiting with someone he knows personally.

please click through for my Comment:
http://eusaforums.com/forum/index.php/topic,28868.msg492807.html#msg492807

I concede the point that when you are dealing with a friend, when there is no urgency and when the friend refuses to fill out the prescribed form because he is special, it is perfectly appropriate to ignore all the usual proceedures, call another friend who gives you a vague answer, and then do what you wanted to do all along for your first friend. If that is the standard, it has indeed been met.

The speaker was, I thought, considering something different: rules and proceedures to be followed consistently. Followed consistently so that the sanction of automatic censure made sense. Followed consistently so that congress would not be faced with a member and players forgetting to mention something as unimportant as "I sought and obtained authorization". Followed consistently so that a player didn't repeatedly say "I didn't follow the rules", and then change that to "oh yeah, forgot to tell you, I followed the rules". Followed consistently so that players wouldn't be asked to believe wholesale nonsense. Bright line rules are useful.

Having accepted your point, however, I withdraw gracefully and send -
kind regards.

you're good, olivermellors. you're absolutely right to call Bullsh*t when you see it-- when people stop doing that, the whole system breaks down.

Thank you!!!

Great job.

Excellent work, thank you for keeping us updated.

35 comments and over 200 votes. I demand a recount.