Br0ad & Pred Drunk On Power : Goes On Rampage
•
by Australian Warlord
In seperate incidences last night, Br0adside & Preditorian went on power fuelled rampages in disgraceful acts on abuse of power.
Incidence 1 : Some of you will know that Able Kane opposes the reallotting of the vacated eNSW seat to ANP. Kane made the mistake of saying so in a discussion on the chat channel. Br0ad decided that noone would be permitted to express a opinion contrary to his own & immediately used admin privilages to place a full administrative block against Kane. Br0ad's actions even outraged several supporters of the proposal including Srg91. Br0ad then threatened to placed a admin block against Srg91 who responded by dareing Br0ad to ban him as well.
Of course Br0ad hadn't finished for the night. Rather he was just starting.
(Br0ad fully publicly reveiled the congress topic that the following relates to however I'm not going to repeat the disclosure here)
Incidence 2.1 : Late yesterday afternoon a new congress topic came up which would massively increase the costs of certain things to eAustralia (we're talking potentially about 800-1000 eGold with nothing in return).
I made the comment that the proposal would massively increase the costs to eAustralia with zero benefit to eAustralia. I continued by saying that some congress members oppose the item already under agreement argueing that it's too costly & the only reason why these people would vote for this new amended proposal is if they wanted to sabotage the item in question.
Pred is one of the people that oppose the item in question succeeding. He responded by issuing a official warning against myself & threatening a ban against myself.
Incidence 2.2 : Back to Br0ad. Fresh from his attack & banning of Kane, Br0ad was in a mood to mouth off. Of course there's hardly a session where I'm not going to be attacked. Br0ad decided to talk all about the congress topic in question, revealing the details of the topic as well as Pred's threats. Then Br0ad said something extraordinary.
Br0ad revealed that a group of congress members have bets in how quickly they can get certain new members kicked from the congress (including myself). Br0ad revealled the depths that these people will go to get rid of 'undesirables' from congress.
Update Incidence 2.3 : Pred has placed a temp ban against myself from the forum congress & has threatened to place a permanent ban against myself in a despicable attack against democracy in eAustralia
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I am reminded of the outrage against the eRep Admins, when they banned a certain member of the eAus community without entertaining any debate on the issue. It would appear some in the eAus congress have adopted this style of power display for their own.
Why do you place yourself in positions where you are so combative all the time?
@haugen. COMPLETELY agree.
@Haug - I don't think they are, I think they are very passionate about democracy and there are people in eAus that are very passionate about keeping things under thier control.
For instance Pred and Broad were very vocaqlly opposed about me organising the AIP yet were the first to support Xavier running for CP. They flip flop very easily depending on will get them the most perceived gain for their own needs.
I have read the Senate Forums and only saw passion from AW nothing that offended me at all. Senate should be open and honest about idea's and I love to see passion. AW and I have had heated debates many times in the past but he always speaks from a believe of improving eAus.
Also seeing this incident on top of what happened to Able who has always been a very level headed erep player who argues intelligently it has made me realy question how we run government in eAus.
Would love to see comments from the general public on how they see us as Senate. Are they getting what they voted for?
I really disliked these two incidents
some members in government need to get rid of the us vs them mentality. Both these acts are unwarrented (i belive AWs comments in congress should have amounted to a warning, but only a warning)we really need to get discussions going instead of arguements
In reply to "incidence 2.3" - please refer to the rules:
2.2 No insult, public accusation without proof, or indirect attack on a citizen are allowed.
It would appear you should watch exactly what you say AW. Yes you've been put under a 12hr temp ban from the senate forums. However there HASN'T been even a discussion of a permanent ban. Unless you can provide "proof" as the rules demand, then perhaps you should be keeping such unfounded accusations to yourself?
*Disclaimer* - I'm neither approving nor condemning the actions of Pred or Br0ad. I'm simply outlining what could be taken as a violation of eRepublik rules.
You've been mistreated, I agree, but can't you just... get off the war zone and... f*** off?
Jokes, jokes.
@SOR : There's been further discussions including Br0ad's material in the senate last night. I also don't know what material has been edited as I don't currently have access to the forums.
the unfortunate thing about bringing items such as this in the public light is that most of the information needed to hold a careful and considered debate can not actually b revealed, resulting in what can be at times a very one sided debate.
i do not agree with br0ads actions on IRC and as such he has been punished and is no longer an admin there.
2.1 is currently being discussed in the senate and any comments / discussion about said incedent should be held off untill it is either rejected or accepted and put into public view. by discussing it in what is a very one sided manner you are potentially putting yourself and others into a vulnerable position as putting up details and information to defend themselves could see them thrown out of the senate for breaking its protocolls.
perhaps holding back on the mudslinging until an actual decision has been reached would be a better option to maintain the peace within all parties concerned
Such a lack of transparency and debate in government is highly disappointing. No matter whose judgements were 'right'.
What type of system do we have that allows the banning of our representatives from what they are supposed to representing us in?. AW is representing the eAustralian people. I don't care if he abuses anyone. He, and any other senator should not be banned from discussions, no matter how inappropriate their behaviour is
There is a surprising amount of transparency in the government. I admit i was a big sceptic of this "transparency" that had seemed to be promised but wasn't.
Since joining the senate however and having complete access to the senate discussions, you realise the vast majority of the senate is there in open view for everyone to see. Of those few items that aren't originally available to the public, most of those become available a short time later. (sometimes even the same day it's voted on in the senate, so once we know the outcome- you know the outcome!)
@AW - The point still remains you have made accusations without proof. Once access has been restored (which should be in a few hours), you'll have access to the records there.
I would've hoped that perhaps if you believed there was a problem you could've taken it up with the Speaker/Deputy Speaker. Seeing as in this case the Speaker seems to be one you disagree with, there still is no reason why you couldn't have raised your concerns with the PM or IG (good example of where the IG could've been useful). So next time, please take a more diplomatic approach that has a higher likelihood of being settled calmly, and quicker than simply running off and crying foul without evidence.
*Disclaimer* - Same as above...
@Ten Cent Style: Since when was a Government Completely Transparent on every single thing it did all the time? Some issues need secrecy. If your not sure about it, read the Government Secrets Act in the policies section of the Forum or on the website.
@PezCore: While I don't support the actions taken, mainly because I missed the incident on IRC and there is currently discussion regarding the issue of his Temp Ban in the Senate, your own comments are incorrect Pez. Pred is the Speaker of the Senate, voted in by the Senators. His duties include warning and evicting (on a temp basis) those that cause trouble, incite hatred, personally attack etc. While heated discussion is permitted, the other things are not, and the Speaker is well within his right to warn and temp ban, provided he has the proof.
AW however took a huge risking bringing this out into the public eye, and frankly I don't see why he didn't just take it to the admins of the forums, it may have been overturned then. But as usual AW likes the Public attention, hence the reason for the very public comments.
I will add however that I agreed with some of his comments.
To those saying that I should have been quiet on this. There's comments being made publically & I have zero opportunity to defend myself as there's a ban against me (nothing new there).
In regards to the item that was used as a excuse by Pred to place a ban against me, there was nothing to warrant such a action.
This particular item in question reminds me of the Republic Convention (1999??) in which there was massive discussion as to whether Monarchists would vote for a publicly less liked option to ensure that the referendum would fail. From memory most Monarchists abstained from the final vote but it shows how people can vote for a particular item to ensure failure of the item in question.
_ __ __ _
Of course we ain't talking about one event in the last 24 hours. We also have Br0ad's banning of Kane from the chatroom (by admin block) & threats against Srg91 when he objected to Br0ad's actions (in which Srg91 responded by dareing Br0ad to do it). You also have Br0ad publicly reviewing the details of the congress item in question is a attack against myself in which he mentioned bets on how quickly they could get 'undesirable' people like myself out of congress (apparently Br0ad has $20 for me to be out within 2 weeks).
______________________________
The last 24 hours has seen seperate attempts by Br0ad & Pred to stifle eAustralian democracy. The seperate discussions on different topics by Kane & myself were legitimate. The only error was that Br0ad & Pred disagreed with the views expressed.
Particularly in Kane's case, it's abundantly clear that open expression of viewpoints on topics are under threat.
@Xavier
I'm talking about the bans that are occurring. I don't care about those acts, I've read them. If they protect the government from criticism they should be thrown out point blank. It's disappointing that people receive bans for anything but the most heinous of crimes.
But more to the point, unless the economic debates in the senate are also full of conspiracy and you are lazily running your mouth off about delicate situations, there is hardly any justification for hiding the debates from the public. That's another topic though, not going to derail.
This affects transparency because it gives the government absolute control over what is known about it.
I suppose constantly re-electing governments will always make them arrogant. I somehow doubt you ever declassify notes that are out of date, too, although I haven't checked. If I were a senator or PM, that would sure as hell be a top concern of mine.
First reaction:
I AM A MALE
I AM A MALE
I AM A MALE
I AM A MALE
I AM A MALE
Second reaction: I will get back to you when I am updated with what happened.
srg91, your avatar is pretty hot for a male.
@ Ten Cents As A current Senator I really wish there was some way to show people that the things spoken about in the Sensitive Area really need to be kept in there. What is spoken about is not things that are easily spoken about in normal proceedings like economics etc.
@ AW, The breach of the Governments Secret Act 04/09 is a serious allegation with serious consequences; therefore I have opened in enquiry with the Inspector-General to find out if the breach did occur so we can rectify it.
I trust you will be able to provide the IG with any information he might need.
The second allegation about a group of senators actively conspiring to “bully” other senators or manipulate them to an extent which would cause them stress is serious and disturbing if true.
I ask that if it is true then the parties come forward and apologise to the people that elected them for the childish behaviour.
Ok, I am updated with your issue two(I think). I think that your wording was not the best choice for a senator, BUT the temp ban in my opinion is an overkill.
@Issue one, Just to clarify here, Br0adside did not ban able, he kicked able out of the channel. Nonetheless, I still do not like how he treated able, even tho I like br0adside to bits. (in the strictly none gay way).
@sun, I like to admire hot girls when I play games, GOT A PROBLEM????
No problems. I just think your avatar is hot.
I just went ROFL when AW called you a "her".
Actually Srg Suntan's had some interesting avatars too.
@ AW you must admit - you do love stirring things up and you can't really be surprised when many ppl take offense. but what pezcore said you are a representative and should be allowed full voice to debate IN the senate - not in the media necessarily due to confidentiality requirements.
After that it's a vote, and if you don't like the result, get more like minded ppl voted in..
"Of course there's hardly a session where I'm not going to be attacked."
Because its not like you ever bring it upon yourself... no sir, never.
LOL srg, 5th time this weeks 😛P
Lucky I wasnt on IRC at the time all thia happened. 😃 But from what I see, Br0ad may have acted a bit too harsh.
For incident 2.1 and 2.3, some have says you breached the forum or senate rules in posting. As Preditorian was Speaker, he had the utmost right in banning you. However he again is a bit over in banning instead of a warning/caution. As Deputy Speaker, I will have a talk with him.
Before we all start blaming lets all each other, lets hear Pred's and Br0ad's view the to the story.
Broad has been and will continue to be rocket fuel to any debate which he will stop at nothing to turn into a fight and flaming. So many times he wastes his talent and knowledge of the game on useless and TOTALLY counter productive rants. Just imagine what our country could have if we could harness Broad's evil and use it as good. 🙂
It's too bad so few people can realize that if you are not a part of the solution then you ARE part of the problem.
There are three things you can do:
- Be negative and counter productive which means that you are forever moving backwards.
- Be neutral which mean you same the same.
- Be positive and productive which means that you are forever learning, helping, and growing.
Many people within our government choose to be negative like Broad, some choose neutral, and some like myself choose to be positive. 🙂
@ Braod
It been told to me by many that I am up for several "Crispy Critter Awards." For those of you that do not know, Broad takes great pride in "flaming" people. In private, non transparent IRC he and his buddies actually keep track of the people he flames and keep a running total. They award people what they call "Crispy Critter Awards" when Broad can flame them in public forum 30 days in a row.
Is this the kind of people you really want in your government? Don't you think they should be working on and discussing more important things? Don't you think they should be working to unite our country instead of trying to cause a great divide?
Please remember these things for the next election. Please remember the people like Patti11, Scotywest, and many others that heavily support Broad. The time is coming to rid our government of the counter productive people to make a better country for us all. It's your choice, your voice, your vote. Next time PLEASE do the right thing when you cast your vote. 🙂
John
Senator AW signed an agreement which stated what behavior was and was not available in the Senate when he was elected. By calling some Senators "traitors" he offended them and was given a warning. When responding with aggression to the Speaker's warning, he was given a temp ban so that he could cool down and not inhibit the debate of the topic for the rest of the Senate. From what I see, there is no violation in the Senate conduct. As for IRC, I don't know what was said.
@Icey-"It's too bad so few people can realize that if you are not a part of the solution then you ARE part of the problem."
This is excellent. I just wish you could follow your own advice.
As I think it's already been pointed out, AW wasn't temp-suspended from the Senate because of his views.
He was temp-suspended because he made some statements towards other Senators that weren't needed in the discussion and would be considered inflammatory.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it." --Stephen G Tallentyre
I heartily endorse this mode of thinking, but I draw the line at the point at which somebody makes a comment at the end of argument that could be taken as a insult by another player.
Debating (or even arguing - to some degree) is ok with me, but personal attacks in any form don't help your side of the debate. The object in a debate is to win people over to your side, not alienate them 😉
@ Haug
It you, DA, Patti11, Broad, the whole "Old Crew" that demand total control. You are not happy that you are losing your control. I can understand all of your frustrations.
It's amazing that Broad can ALWAYS say whatever he wants when ever he wants no matter how bad it is and the "Old Crew" stand right along side him.
It's just that simple. If you cannot take the heat then it's high time to get out of the kitchen boys. 🙂
But I guess that you may do as you wish when you are "drunk with power." It's a sad sad day when you, the "Old Crew" REFUSE to allow to rightfully elected people have their say. 🙂
John
@Derek & Haug : What comments towards another congress member was this? You're merely creating slander knowing that I can't quote the material due to "congress confidentality".
I'm going to directly call both of you two people liers.
@AW: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
You ask me what comments these were, knowing full well that if I tell, I'll be in breach of Senate protocol as well.
Nice try, but no cigar 😉
You could call me a liar from now until doomsday, and I wouldn't give a f. I know I'm telling the truth.
I'll even give you directions: go the "the" thread, and look at your two posts on the first page, the Speaker has even been so kind as to highlight said comments in red 😛
10:21 mib_09ivep: heard you lost your IRC powers for abuse broad? lol. im shocked you still havent commented in the newspaper artice.
10:21 Br0a😛 nah didnt want to stir the pot 😉
10:22 mib_09ivep: i wouldnt say it would be stirring the pot. mearly explaining your actions.
10:22 Br0a😛 DA is doing a good enuff job without me 😛
10:22 Br0a😛 nah AW put it nicelty
10:22 Br0a😛 nicely*
10:22 mib_09ivep: so the betting to get people outta congress is true aswell?
10:22 mib_09ivep: wow lol.
10:22 Br0a😛 lol no not that bit
10:22 Br0a😛 nah we did that on purpose while AW was here in the idler section
10:23 mib_09ivep: ahh ok
10:23 Derek_Apollyon: and what about these "toasted" awards?
10:23 Br0a😛 another joke for AW when we had flamewars
10:23 Br0a😛 same thing, he was in idler section
10:23 Br0a😛 we decided to entice him a little 😉
😁
all you had to do was ask, there "they" whoever they were did it for a joke while AW was idle.
and yeah i couldnt get Pandemic to work on the IRC =[.
@Icey, the "Old Crew" as you put it, defend people who they know are right. I did some wrong things back when I was the MoFA and Cottus punished me for it. Perhaps its just that people, like you, are constantly wrong about things and because of this the "old crew" doesn't like you.
The old crew as you put it isn't clinging to power. Indeed many of us stepped down. I took a two month break to let newer people come in, but at some point or another it comes down to who is most qualified, and without a doubt the cream always rises to the top. The cream is us.
Sorry guys, we just have to call it how we see it. 🙂 AW and I put together cannot match the things that Broad says in a week and you know it. He's part of your crew so it's cool with you guys. lol... you guys are probably in on the "Crispy Critter Awards" too.
@ Haug
Does most qualified mean the crew with the most multis supporting and voting for them? Just wondering as your crew member Scoty has been Permanently Banned twice.
John (Icey1174)
@Icey: Do you play "dodge comment" or the even more obscure version called "dodge fact" (they are kinda like "dodge ball") for a living?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you're allowed "to call it how we see it," then I'm allowed to as well. 😉
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
If you honestly think some profiles are that of multis, THEN REPORT THEM 😛
If they're multis, then the Admins will ban them; if not, then drop it.
If you post again saying that people in the Government are using multis and not provide ANY EVIDENCE, I will report you for violation of Rule 2.2
whats rule 2.2?
"No insult, public accusation without proof, or indirect attack on a citizen are allowed."
good, reported. 😛
Amen. It's true, Icey. You do have a tendency to avoid replying to comments that irrevocably are true.
As much as you will think I am a liar for saying this, I don't hate anyone. I try my best to approach everything with an open mind and it kills me to see people who constantly push only one mindset and refuse to admit it when they are wrong. I will own up to being wrong, there is no fault with it. The fault comes when you are too arrogant to admit defeat.
*Yawn* You make lame excuses, the only thing you're aiming for is using your finger pointing to increase your political capital, as to act like a rebel you think that, that will stirr up enough votes for you to make you popular with the common Australian. Your deceitful acts knows no limits.
@ DA
"If you post again saying that people in the Government are using multis and not provide ANY EVIDENCE, I will report you for violation of Rule 2.2"
Scotywest is living, or should I say dead, proof of our government utilizing multis? Even the Admins investigated and found it to be true. For God's sake the guy was our Deputy PM. How much more proof do you need than the Admins banning them? Am I missing something here?!?! Cal? Oh, he was also banned for having multis and even recently admitted to using them and claiming to allow them to die. Did I miss anything else? 🙂
What's even worse is that he is STILL utilized as our Deputy PM within the forums. The citizen is dead. I am sure reforms will be made that ORGs or "dead" Citizens cannot play a role within our government and dictate their rule through forums.
John
@ Cal
The "Old Crew" does not like people who refuse to conform to their rigid ideals. If I conform "they" would love me. But because I cite things like waste with Centrelink and how much time our elected and dead government officials spend on flaming people they have issues with me.
Sorry. 🙂
John
I've already reported you. I really don't care. And before you accuse people of flaming, read your comments first.
Truth is not flaming. Cal, you are a proven cheat, liar, and thief. Report all you want. 🙂
John
if im lying. why am i still here?
@ Cal
You lied when you said you had no multis and then in open forum you admitted to having them and using them to earn money to repay TBA.
I do not think that lying is against the rules. 🙂
You are a proven and admitted thief no matter how you try to justify it.
The cheat part is combined with your past practice of multis and your theft from TBA.
John
Icey, what forums are u talking about? If ur talking about the eAus forums, I only have 4 posts. I never said that I used the multis to make money to pay back TBA.
@ Cal
The media here.
You do however have a grand history of deleting pretty much anything you ever said including the forums.
John
Thats just an outright lie Icey. Im reportin ya again. 😃
@ Cal
Here's the link to your article of great detail. I suspect it will be deleted once you read this comment.
http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-bit-of-an-explanation-from-calibur-and-his-future-intentions-update--795247/1/20" target="_blank">http://www.erepublik.com/en/article/a-bi[..]1/20
Read the article. You utilized multis to earn money. You clearly state that in your comments:
"I'm letting those accounts die. All of the money made went back to TBA. Its all to him. He's fully paid. Broadside, those multis are gone, whether you like it or not. I'm back, and I'm here to stay."
Come on Cal. Please just give up on this already.
John