King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 12:30:31 GMT -6
I hadn't given sufficient attention (until yesterday) to the way Executive Orders are done under the Fiovan Constitution. It seems backwards to me, having the Cunstaval issue the Order and the Capitan co-sign it; rather as if, on the national level, the King were to issue Prime Dictates and the Seneschal co-sign them. (Or the King write legislation, and the Cosa maybe veto.) You get my point; the roles seem reversed. I'd suggest an amendment to make it work the other way around.
Meanwhile, until further notice, I hereby instruct the Constable of Fiova not to issue any further Executive Order.
Thank you for your indulgence.
— John R
|
|
|
Post by Martì Prevuost on Jan 22, 2013 12:47:31 GMT -6
Pardon me, Your Majesty but to clarify - the instruction is to not issue any further Executive Order until further notice.
This seems all together well and fitting. Is there any implied restriction on the Constable issuing Provincial Royal Decrees to, oh, I don't know, grant awards and honours or any other thing Organically granted as a Royal Power?
MAG
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Jan 22, 2013 13:18:57 GMT -6
You're instructing the Cunstaval to refrain from exercising a role that the Provincial Constitution enables him to fill? Perhaps you could explain to us why it is you're 'instructing' the Cunstaval to refrain from issuing further Executive Orders when our Constitution, approved by the relevant officials and whatnot, specifically details that it is in this format that our business is conducted.
The reason our XOs are presented thus is due to the connection Fiova has to the Talossan Republic - whose President issued Executive Orders on behalf of the Government.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 13:29:24 GMT -6
The Crown should have a reasonable chance to exercise its veto over Provincial legislation — including executive orders. Yes, I shouldn't issue an Executive Order if it's the sort of thing I would want to veto; but that consideration doesn't always seem to work, does it? It's not a good position for the Constitution to put me in, when the first I hear of some piece of legislation is that I've already approved of it.
I think we all understand my concern, no?
— John R
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Jan 22, 2013 14:32:05 GMT -6
That doesn't appear answer my question regarding why you want to prevent the Fiovan Government from issuing any further Executive Orders.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 15:00:16 GMT -6
That doesn't answer your question? OK, I'll speak more plainly.
The Fiovan government can issue orders all it wants to. But I decline at least for the time being to participate, having had a rough introduction to the process.
Look, the powers-that-be in Fiova worked up an Order which you certainly at least suspected I'd have a problem with. It was done under the table, as it were, and instead of asking whether I'd consent or whether I had alternative suggestions, and instead of passing it as regular legislation (which would have taken a day or two, and given time for a response), you induced the Constable to issue it in a way that bypassed me. OK, fair enough, if that's how you want to play it; but don't expect me to come begging for more.
If you'd thought to ask, you would have found that discussions within the College of Arms were within an hour or two of giving you everything you wanted, in the heraldic arena anyway. Instead, you indulged in a public and divisive display of ... what, pique? politics?, and somewhat embarrassed the Crown. Which I will be forgiven for suspecting was not unintentional.
— John R
|
|
|
Post by C. Carlüs Xheraltescù on Jan 22, 2013 15:19:19 GMT -6
Had I thought it was inOrganic, do you believe i would be seeking to contest the injunction placed upon the Fiovan College of Arms? I assumed that since the Cunstaval has ignored some of my requests for an XO in the past by simply not responding to my messages, that if he believed there was a problem, he would certainly inform me of this.
Claims have been made in the past that republicanism lacked the pomp and ceremonious fun that royalism can supply. Myself and several other republicans wished to disprove this. I did not seek to undermine an existing organisation, and I honestly thought that a little competition would be fun and therefore beneficial to Talossa. Perhaps you should have thought to ask before presuming to know my intentions.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 15:34:02 GMT -6
If I misread your intentions, S:reu Xheraltescu, I apologize. It wasn't you, I realize, who mocked "the monarchists" when objections to the Order were raised.
— John R
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Jan 22, 2013 15:37:46 GMT -6
I think arms and heraldry in Talossa is nonsense, but harmless nonsense. However, my impression would be that this XO was drafted when it seemed as if the Dean refused to grant arms to republicans. It might have been rash, might have been hasty, but I very much doubt the intention was to embarrass the king.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Jan 22, 2013 15:49:25 GMT -6
If I misread your intentions, S:reu Xheraltescu, I apologize. It wasn't you, I realize, who mocked "the monarchists" when objections to the Order were raised. — John R You know what really gets my goat? The Head of State, and cxhn M. T. Biondeu elsewhere, feel free to abuse me personally and think that because they don't say my name it's okay. The whole point, as far as I'm concerned, is that the Dean of the College of Arms was trying to deny republican-leaning citizens arms, and as we all know "arms" are one of the selling points of this Kingdom. An officer of the Royal Household was trying to tell Talossan republicans that they were excluded from a major cultural institution of the Kingdom. I think if anyone's embarrassed the Talossan monarchy here, it's the Dean of the College of Arms. (EDITED. Thanks for the hint, Cpt Preston.)
|
|
Capt. Sir Mick Preston
Capitán of the Zouaves
Posts: 6,511
Talossan Since: 9-21-2006
Knight Since: 10-12-2010
Motto: Cuimhnichibh air na daoine bho'n d'thainig sibh
|
Post by Capt. Sir Mick Preston on Jan 22, 2013 15:59:40 GMT -6
If I misread your intentions, S:reu Xheraltescu, I apologize. It wasn't you, I realize, who mocked "the monarchists" when objections to the Order were raised. — John R You know what really gets my goat? The Head of State, and cxhn M. T. Biondeu elsewhere, feel free to abuse me personally and think that because they don't say my name it's okay. The whole point, as far as I'm concerned, is that the Squirrel King of Arms was trying to deny republican-leaning citizens arms, and as we all know "arms" are one of the selling points of this Kingdom. An officer of the Royal Household was trying to tell Talossan republicans that they were excluded from a major cultural institution of the Kingdom. I think if anyone's embarrassed the Talossan monarchy here, it's the Squirrel King of Arms. Point of fact: It was the Dean, not the Squirrel King that initially started this, brought it to the College's attention as a whole, then reversed his decision later.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 16:00:02 GMT -6
That's "abuse"? Wow.
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Jan 22, 2013 16:02:27 GMT -6
At least have the nerve to mention my name when you're blaming me for stuff, sir.
|
|
King John
King of Talossa
Posts: 2,415
Talossan Since: 5-7-2005
Knight Since: 11-30-2005
Motto: COR UNUM
King Since: 3-14-2007
|
Post by King John on Jan 22, 2013 17:30:22 GMT -6
That's "blaming"? Sheesh. I said you mocked someone. (Wouldn't you have called it mocking?) If not, OK, but I really don't think that saying "Bill mocked Jim" is either abusing Bill or blaming him for anything.
No, I didn't name you in my slightly critical mention of what you wrote, not from lack of nerve but from a sort of instinct for obliquity. (Would you have been better pleased if I'd congratulated S:reu Xheraltescu for not acting like Dame Miestra?) You have a very harsh manner sometimes; I get the impression you're proud of and pleased with your harsh manner ("garça malpardert"), and sometimes with its effects. (I don't like it when you do that, but one could argue that's just my problem.) But if you're going to cultivate a rhetorical style that gets right in people's faces, you can't really be too surprised when they sometimes express their discomfort, or even gently criticize how you say things.
— John R
|
|
Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN
Seneschal
the new Jim Hacker
Posts: 6,635
Talossan Since: 6-25-2004
Dame Since: 9-8-2012
Motto: Expulseascâ, reveneascâ
Baron Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
Duke Since: Feudal titles are for gimps
|
Post by Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN on Jan 22, 2013 17:37:07 GMT -6
You say "obliquity", we say "passive-aggressive". I have an intolerance for those who hide nastiness behind a veil of politeness. I am not the one who tried to revoke the citizenship of Talossans, or to deny them heraldry, based on a political test; and yet the Head of State, and other citizens, seem to think that it is I who am the problem around here.
I say that the problem is that some members of the political majority don't accept the political minority's right to exist; and I don't care how polite or "oblique" about it they are. This reminds me of the woman who complained about her priest's abusive behaviour to her children, and the congregation asked her to quit coming to services because of her "harsh manner" and "getting right in people's faces".
|
|