American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

ACWGC Forums

* ACWGC    * Dpt. of Records (DoR)    *Club Recruiting Office     ACWGC Memorial

* CSA HQ    * VMI   * Join CSA    

* Union HQ   * UMA   * Join Union    

CSA Armies:   ANV   AoT

Union Armies:   AotP    AotT

Link Express

Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:37 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:46 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Canada
Voting Booth: http://wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=18371


Rules Review and Amendment Proposal
3.1.3 & 3.3.4.2.1
(Prerequisites for Elective Office Candidates)


BACKGROUND

On November 4, the Cabinet began to formally entertain the proposal submitted by Brig. Gen. Gregor Olinsky requesting a review of the supposed discrepancy and contradiction found between Rules 3.1.3 and 3.3.4.2.1. These rules are set out below.

3.1.3 An officer’s rank will have no direct relationship to his or her position in the hierarchy.


3.3.4.2.1 Candidates for Cabinet Secretary or Club President must hold the rank of Colonel or above. To be eligible for a CoA position, a member must hold the rank of Lieutenant General or above in their respective Army.


Brig. Gen. Olinsky contends that while the latter rule imposes a prerequisite of rank upon the candidacy of anyone striking for an elective office, especially that of a CoA, that the former rule disposes of any rank requirement at all. He further asked the “Cabinet to investigate the matter and determine whether Rule 3.3.4.2.1 should be struck from the Club Rules.”

FINDINGS

The Cabinet acknowledges that a discrepancy does exist within the currently worded rules as Brig. Gen. Olinsky has pointed out. The Cabinet also acknowledges that the substance of the proposal directly raises the question of whether prerequisites of any type ought to be imposed on candidates for elective office, as the striking of Rule 3.3.4.2.1 would disallow.

Irrespective of the individual preferences of the Cabinet members and the internal arguments for and against such a proposal, the Cabinet assesses that this issue should be presented in front of the members for a club-wide vote, as it constitutes a revision to the existing rules. To definitively accomplish this, the Cabinet has structured an either/or vote preference for the club to consider.

PROPOSED RULES AMENDMENTS

The Cabinet will offer the club membership a choice between two separate rules amendments.

The first choice, labeled “A,” allows for a clarified distinction between hierarchy ranks and elective office by amending Rule 3.1.3 to read as follows:

Selection “A,” Amendment to Club Rule 3.1.3


3.1.3 With the exception of the elective offices an officer's rank will have no direct relationship to his or her position in the hierarchy. (Rank is determined by points, as explained in Section 4.0)

A vote for this amendment will preserve all of the current rank requirements for candidates to the elective offices and not change Rule 3.3.4.2.1.

The second choice, labeled “B,” completely eliminates Rule 3.3.4.2.1 as advocated by Brig. Gen. Olinsky and allows any club member to run for any elective office he might choose with no prerequisites attached.

Selection “B,” Eliminate Club Rule 3.3.4.2.1


3.3.4.2.1 Candidates for Cabinet Secretary or Club President must hold the rank of Colonel or above. To be eligible for a CoA position, a member must hold the rank of Lieutenant General or above in their respective Army.


A vote for this amendment removes the prerequisites formerly established for the elective offices.

(Note: A passage of Selection “B” would also entail a re-numbering of the remaining elements of Rule 3.3.4.2.)

This selection is presented as a forum vote, with only one selection possible.

I want to thank the Cabinet for their efforts and especially Joe Meyer for his contribution in the writing this up.

The voting booth will be open for two weeks till the 30th.

Thank you.

_________________
Best Regards,

General Pierre D.

5th Bde, IV Cavalry Corps
Army of Northern Virginia
ACWGC President 1997 - 2006, 2012
ACWGC Forum Administrator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 887
Location: Panhandle of Texas
I know I may have spent a bit too much time at the bar but where does one find said voting booth?

_________________
General Mark Nelms
Image
3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"
Image
Union Military Academy Instructor


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:06 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:46 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Canada
Thank you General Nelms, I have added the URL to the message and here it is again:

http://wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=18371

_________________
Best Regards,

General Pierre D.

5th Bde, IV Cavalry Corps
Army of Northern Virginia
ACWGC President 1997 - 2006, 2012
ACWGC Forum Administrator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 9:20 pm 
Members of the ACWGC Cabinet,

This is outstanding! <salute>

Thank you for all your hard work in hearing, reviewing and investigating the above mentioned Club Rules and for composing these Amendments! A most exceptional piece of work!

Warmest Regards,


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:44 pm 
NOTICE:

Just in case anyone is confused (and I am sure some are) this vote/issue is unrelated to the other CoA issue being considered currently by the Cabinet.

This issue/vote deals with the requirements to RUN for office.

The other issue proposed dealt with the requirements to VOTE for the candidate running for said office.

Although the sentences seem a lot alike they actually have vastly different issues at their core.

I just wanted to clear that up in case anyone misread anything or was wondering if the two proposals were linked in some way - they are not.

Thanks all!

Also thanks to the Cabinet for their time and effort in presenting this to us all! :D


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 6:54 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:46 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Canada
Gentlemen,

Here are the results of the membership vote.

The result keeps the current prerequisites and the rule will be edited to remove any confusion.

Thank you all for your participation.

Happy New Year

Quote:
Should Elective Office Rank Prerequisites Be Kept?
Poll ended at 31 Dec 2012 17:43
A. Yes, keep rank prerequisites and modify 3.1.3. 66% 66% [ 40 ] x
B. No, eliminate rank prerequisites and strike 3.3.4.2.1. 34% 34% [ 21 ]
Total votes : 61

_________________
Best Regards,

General Pierre D.

5th Bde, IV Cavalry Corps
Army of Northern Virginia
ACWGC President 1997 - 2006, 2012
ACWGC Forum Administrator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 101 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group