American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Gentlemen <salute>

Riders from General Joe Meyer, Chief of the Yankee Armies, were recieved directed at Confederate officers with the following message:

"Gentlemen of the ACWGC CSA,

The election of a club president knows no bounds between the USA and CSA sides of the club. All of us have a vested interest in who we want to head up our club, and all of us have an equal right in deciding who that person should be with our vote! We also have the right to freely speak our minds on this issue, whether it be within the forums or by personal e-mail. Allow me to speak mine!

Please accept my personal endorsement of General Mark Nelms for the Presidency of the American Civil War Game Club.

It is my opinion that this club will achieved a much more productive, careful and consistent performance from its Cabinet with General Nelms at the helm as president, than with his opponent, General Desruisseaux. Much of what is owed to Pierre for his past involvement and dedication to the ACWGC can never be either fully realized or repaid him. His organizational and technical skills with the forum are formidable, and always have been so. Without his involvement up to this point, the club would have struggled to keep its head above water. I am also of the opinion that Pierre's presence upon the Cabinet as a Secretary, as he now is, or as a perennial close advisor would be decidedly to this club's benefit! However, in terms of leadership characteristics, a huge experience with game involvement and proven merit as a long-standing Academy Instructor, General Nelms must be given the nod as our next Club President.

Mark brings with him a decided bent to fair play and a balanced, seasoned experience in his own right! Where others may chatter on about the benefits of change for change's sake and breathlessly want to imprint the club with their own image, Mark seeks out the real substance of issues, giving the core of the question center stage. He doesn't indulge in rhetoric, nor does he spend much time with those that do. He listens, draws out, examines, and reserves judgment until all has been stated. He respects consensus.

There are many individuals who may claim to have contributed to the welfare of the ACWGC. There are some who have provided milestone achievements to the club's benefit. And there are a few who have never stopped giving of themselves in the support of this thing in which we all participate. Mark Nelms is one of these latter.

This is not a contest between the USA side of the club with the CSA. There are a number of excellent officers within the CSA behind whom I could have thrown my full support as a Presidential candidate and whom stand within the same class of individuals as does Mark. They, however, did not elect to run for office. Mark did!

I urge you to take part in this election by exercising one of your most important rights as a member of this club, and making it count by giving your vote to General Mark Nelms.

General Meyer"

_________________
General Neal Hebert
Edward C. Walthall Division (2nd aka "Gator Alley")
II Corps, Army of the West
CSA Cabinet Secretary

Lt. Gen. Hebert,

My thanks, sir, for publishing this within the forums as I was not able to correctly access all of the CSA officer e-mail addresses from the DoR. It seems that a number of them are either incorrect or defunct. I had signaled Gen. McOmish to see if he could provide me with more current addresses, if and when he had the time. However, this may be able to otherwise reach them in good form!

The officers in question are:

Christian Arndt
Mark Truitt
Matthew Kelich
Scott Ludwig
Vern Pinkham
Bruce Klem
Patrick Mossier
John Munro
Liviu Dudas
Tom Moore
and
Pierre Desruisseaux

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

Gentlemen <salute>

My highest compliements!

In response to General Meyer's dispatch, the following was sent by rider by my command to the addressees:

"Officers of the ACWGC <salute>

My highest compliments! I just realized that General Meyer's message seemed to have been targeted at the Confederate officers of the ACWGC. We'll have to address that in the MDT.

I agree that the election of the club president should know no bounds between the CSA and USA sides of the club. I also agree that we have a vested interest in who should lead our club and have a right to cast our vote in deciding who that person will be.

Until now, I was not aware that persons in positions of authority could send out riders advising who they thought should be elected, although I see that the Yankee CoA has done just that with his recommendation that General Nelms be elected. I have a problem with this.

I am the commander of II Corps, Army of the Mississippi, and today dispatched riders to all of the officers in my command. I will retrieve the dispatch for full disclosure if requested, however at no time did I recommend either candidate over the other. I stressed to the command that the last election saw 50-60 votes cast, and that we should do better as it is our right and duty to do so.

I see that the Super Pac has now entered our club.

I encourage every Confederate officer, and any Yanks who have some semblance of individuality , to cast their votes for General Pierre D. Why?

General Meyer made a good case for it:
"Much of what is owed to Pierre for his past involvement and dedication to the ACWGC can never be either fully realized or repaid him. His organizational and technical skills with the forum are formidable, and always have been so. Without his involvement up to this point, the club would have struggled to keep its head above water." (quoted from General Meyers' dispatch)

o Wow! Sounds pretty impressive to me.

"I am also of the opinion that Pierre's presence upon the Cabinet as a Secretary, as he now is, or as a perennial close advisor would be decidedly to this club's benefit! " (quoted from General Meyers' dispatch)

o Wow! Sounds pretty impressive to me, but they'd prefer to keep him there.

"However, in terms of leadership characteristics, a huge experience with game involvement and proven merit as a long-standing Academy Instructor, General Nelms must be given the nod as our next Club President." (quoted from General Meyers' dispatch)

Wow! General Nelms has been involved with games and served at the Yankee academy. I have a number of games ongoing, and was on the VMI staff for about a year. Anyone want to vote for me? What "leadership characteristics" are we talking about?

My largest problem with General Nelms' platform was his post where he implied that command had a right to control a member's "freedom of choice and thought":

"As to whether a members freedom of choice and thought or the command structures right to control their officers takes precedence is very dependent upon the situation and can't be answered with a choice of one or the other. I would say each would come down to specific circumstances but I would think in most cases I would lean toward the members wishes as much as possible." (General Nelms quoted in his campaign thread)

I've been a member of the ACWGC for 3 1/2 years, with 2 years as a division commander and the last few months as a corps commander. I was a member of the VMI staff for my first year as well. I have never seen it within my authority to determine the "freedom of choice and thought" of those under my command, and would reject any authority that would seek to impose that restriction on me, even if leaning toward "the members (sic) wishes as much as possible".

I encourage all officers of the ACWGC to muster and vote for General Pierre D.! He is intimately familiar with the club functions, was a founding member, and in the capacity of president will serve us all with the same devotion he's exhibited since the club was founded.

Highest regards,

_________________
General Neal Hebert
Edward C. Walthall Division (2nd aka "Gator Alley")
II Corps, Army of the West
CSA Cabinet Secretary

General Meyer <salute>

Suh, my compliments!

I assure you that this was not done as a favor or in support of your efforts. I pray that my reply will point out that your case shows that General Pierre D. has the background and experience necessary for the post. Lord knows what dispatches have been circulating through the Yankee army.

I remembered from a previous election, confirmed by a rather senior Confederate officer, where there was some consternation after a commander advised his officers how he thought they should vote. I advised my officers to read the threads and vote their conscience, and then come back to see your riders to officers of the CSA! I would protest this, however given my position will leave that to my command to determine.

Otherwise, as a member of the ACWGC I will propose through the proper channels that future occurances be prohibited. Candidates have their forums to discuss their platforms and answer questions, and if you want to support them you should do it there.

Highest regards,

_________________
General Neal Hebert
Edward C. Walthall Division (2nd aka "Gator Alley")
II Corps, Army of the West
CSA Cabinet Secretary

General Herbert,

I am confused. You say you have a problem with General Meyer recommending people vote for a candidate, yet you are doing the same. Perhaps I misunderstand something. You may not agree with his preference of candidate but he is acting openly and transparently, and in accordance with the rules. I see no pressure being exerted. My respect for General Meyer or his position would not stop me from voting differently to him if I so chose. If his endorsement of a candidate is not to the taste of some members then so be it. It was his choice to risk that. But why deny him the right to speak?

Super Pac?? I don't really get that...

Implied restrictions on "freedom of choice and thought"?? In 13 1/2 years in this club I've never felt any such restrictions, right from being a fresh-faced Lt, up to being Army Commander and Theater Commander, and now back down as a brigade commander. I've always felt able to speak my mind, contribute to discussions, and vote freely, and I can't see how those freedoms are being threatened now (although you appear to be suggesting a limitation on the freedom of a CoA to speak freely). But that is just my opinion...

Isn't this all a bit dramatic? We have two very good candidates and will end up with a good president. People are entitled to express their opinion but we are free to choose who to vote for. I don't see a problem, personally, although I will be glad when this is all over and we get back to just enjoying our hobby and the camaraderie it provides.

Best wishes.

_________________

General Antony Barlow
2/1/XX, Army of the Cumberland

Even in a divided US, Gen. Meyer, as does any of us, has the right to endorse a candidate. I for one find that no endorsement influences the way I vote.

Well said David - Well said

I wasn't going to respond to this but I was afraid that folks might skip the campaign threads and not read my reply to this point there. To sum it up, I firmly believe that individuals have freedom of thought and choice but since I can't conceive of every possible situation that might arise I just refuse to make a blanket statement that the individual would always be allowed to make the choice they want. An officer is always free to think what he wants and to say otherwise is a misunderstanding of my position. Rest assured I'll will always give the individual his due if possible.

_________________
General Mark Nelms

3/2/XX/AoC "Blackhawk Brigade"

Union Military Academy Instructor

My email address works just fine.

But I am disappointed that someone would mass email the Club, not only their side, but the opposite side with a personal endorsement for an elected office. Though it doesn't occur often, it is often out of respect for the process and the members that a person in position of authority doesn't not do such a thing. If asked by members, you can offer your input. Maybe even emailing your side is slightly acceptable, though I still see that as an issue, but these outright appeals are not the tradition that this Club holds or at least what I've seen in my almost 10 years on the CSA side.

I expect most to vote as they see fit, but I can see a young new member, not knowing anyone beyond his commanders being influenced by this. Believe you me, when I first joined, I held my commanders with high regard, I still hold those guys like that today. Thankfully they never tried to influence me.

But I think, as I've told the CSA command, there needs to be a rule against this from now on.

I think both candidates are good guys and will do a good job. I have not voted yet, as I am still on the fence. Both have a great platform.

Neal - I am a little disappointed that you did post in favor of one over another. But I understand where it came from, just wish you had kept the high ground. Still it is already done.

_________________
General Scott Ludwig
4/II/ANV

Scott,

I actually disagree with the idea that such emailing should be against the rules. I do not agree with Gen. Myers on much of anything, BUT I think the right to do so should be there. I agree that it can be distastful, but I have seen evidence of a Union side effort to elect General Nelms, so in opposition to that I can see that Gen. Hebert had little choice. Had he taken the high road, it would have been advantage Nelms......I'd like to see a debate thread that only the candidates can post in, where they argue their positions pros and cons in future elections.....That would be interesting......Thank you General Hebert for your efforts.

Hank,

Questions in the campaign is one things, as that format is designed to allow them and folks who don't care don't have to follow, but blind pamphleteering is not a tradition of the Club.

I think a candidates only post would be a good idea. There was little interaction between the two.

I do think though that a level of office, particularly a Cabinet level and CoA, TC and maybe even AC should not be allowed to do what Joe did. Debate in the forum, sure, as they are usually some of the few ones interested, but mass mailing should not be allowed at that level. It is a violation of trust. If CC's & DC's want to offer perspective to their men, ok, but again not on what has been done. It leads to partisan politics, which isn't a good example for leaders to be providing to members.

_________________
General Scott Ludwig
4/II/ANV

Scott,

While I absolutely respect your opinion on the propriety of what was done, and do not believe it was in good tastse or indeed that it should have been done, I still believe in the freedom to do the distastful. Should General Meyer's have taken the high road and not done this? YES, I agree with you....I actually agree with every single assertion you made with regards to what General Meyers did........But should he be absolutely restricted from having the political freedom to do so.....I think not.....Should he be punished for it, as have others in the past been? I think not once again. My stand is one of principle, though Joe wants me out of the club, I support his right to political freedom. I will oppose him at every turn in his efforts as long as I have the political freedom to do so.

Well Hank, I'm not going to argue with you, you are entitled to your opinion.

_________________
General Scott Ludwig
4/II/ANV

Agreed.....I suspect we are more on the same side than not......

I would like to add my "WELL SAID!" to the replies to General Barlow's post by Generals Gorce and Purcell. With an added "well said" to one of the of the most balanced and objective members of this club, General Antony Barlow himself who exemplifies what real club spirit is all about. I, too, will be glad when all the dramatics and the election is over, and we can get back to the brotherly spirit that the club claims to foster.

Thank you. <Salute!>

_________________
Major General Tom Ciampa
AoC XIV Corps, Deuce Fourteen