StarGateWars Forums

deni wrote:

pianomutt20000 wrote:Think of it as a president/Vice president deal. In the usa, it USED to be that the runner up became vice president...But the president always maintained the right to fire the Vice President.

I do not think that is the case Bill. The President can ask for his resignation but not fire the Vice President

Just a point of fact, the president can not fire the VP, nor can he ask for his resignation. The Vice-Presidency in a Constitutionally elected official . He can only be removed by the Congress ( the people ) in an impeachment trial .

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Well ombudsman desitions are final understudy cant remove that.

And when is bill loosing his ombudsman power and zeek getting his??

Nimras wrote:

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Well ombudsman desitions are final understudy cant remove that.

And when is bill loosing his ombudsman power and zeek getting his??

It's in progress.

~FreeSpirit~ wrote:

judochop wrote:They can't send PM's to the Ombudsman and have him/her commincate that through the proper channels?

And they need the ombudsman for? PM's are not monitored by mods and there are no rules according to pm's. If they only actively use the pm system it doesnt make them part of the community. For being part of a community you have to be activly involved. Only pm-ing a few people isnt what i would call being involved.

1st. Thank GOD your opinion doesn't matter.
2nd. There is NO rules about PM's? So if i wanted to send you PM's filled with vulgar pictures I could? Now stop talking Freespirit you are DONE.

Real nice way to defend ur statement or counter mine Judochop. If that is the best u can come up with go roar your ugly head somewhere else.

Im done when i close my eyes for the last time thnx though. Nether are you the person who can shut me up in a free forum with freedom of speech. If u wanna send me vulgair pm's go ahead I personnaly woudnt care for a sec it just gets deleted with the others useless pm's that get send on occassion. My oppinion might not matter to u and sure u can thank ur God for that but apperently there are still people that value my input.

Are we done here yet?

Ehm no

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Exactly correct


And Nimras I know you can't wait to see the back of me


I'll be back, lol. 2010 most likely.

pianomutt20000 wrote:

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Exactly correct


And Nimras I know you can't wait to see the back of me


I'll be back, lol. 2010 most likely.

then perhaps bill should read the forum a little bit better before posting stuff :

[quote='robe']To ensure consistency in decision making, the Understudy will not overturn any decisions that the Ombudsman has made unless compelling new evidence becomes available and the complaint requires immediate attention[/quote]

zeekomkommer wrote:

pianomutt20000 wrote:

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Exactly correct


And Nimras I know you can't wait to see the back of me


I'll be back, lol. 2010 most likely.

then perhaps bill should read the forum a little bit better before posting stuff :

[quote='robe']To ensure consistency in decision making, the Understudy will not overturn any decisions that the Ombudsman has made unless compelling new evidence becomes available and the complaint requires immediate attention

[/quote]



But at the same time, i wish to address that the ombudsman SHOULD be able to overrule the understudy.

pianomutt20000 wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:

pianomutt20000 wrote:

Zeratul wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:why would there need to be any reason to fire me if i play by the rules. perhaps you are forgetting that the understudy is elected to. only time someone can actualy fire me is when i keep breacking the forum rules

or are you saying i can't do the job before it has even started ?

we believe pianomutt was referring to a situation where a understudy starts overturning decisions by ombudsman and generally making a mess of things... he wanted to know then whether it would be possible for ombudsman to fire understudy...

he's NOT saying that you should be fired...

Exactly correct


And Nimras I know you can't wait to see the back of me


I'll be back, lol. 2010 most likely.

then perhaps bill should read the forum a little bit better before posting stuff :

[quote='robe']To ensure consistency in decision making, the Understudy will not overturn any decisions that the Ombudsman has made unless compelling new evidence becomes available and the complaint requires immediate attention

But at the same time, i wish to address that the ombudsman SHOULD be able to overrule the understudy.

Well of course he should..... is anyone actually disputing that?

judochop wrote:1st. Thank GOD your opinion doesn't matter.
2nd. There is NO rules about PM's? So if i wanted to send you PM's filled with vulgar pictures I could? Now stop talking Freespirit you are DONE.

First: Thank GOD... I mean thank JACK that his opinion is far more valuable then yours.

Second: Yes, that's exactly what it means. But 1, do not break the law in doing so, 2. do know that if you annoy people they can block you and 3. while FreeSpirit can block you, you can not block FreeSpirit. So do not annoy him, because he can annoy you and there wont be a damned thing you can do about it.

Manetheren wrote:Are we done here yet?

Yes.