Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

We are at the end of the month
Sorry just kidding

My goal is to be constructive not to criticize the current Cabinet. I have some friends (or at least some officers that I played with in the past) in the Cabinet and I am sure they had done their best. But, knowing very well the Cabinet mechanism, I just would like to participate to the debate and give the humble opinion of an old officer : Compromise is always the best solution ! With compromise and explanations you avoid to have winners and loosers and so on you avoid crisis and claiming.

Regards

General Lamezec
Prince et Comte de Davout
IVème Corps

See next message. Sorry for my mistake

I think you misunderstood them. Traditions and equality between members were not respected by the Cabinet vote. I don't say that I don't understand why the Allied members of the Cabinet vote as they vote but I would like that you (and everybody) understand why they choose to leave (it's my understood, not necessary the truth). I just consider that may be all was not done (even some little efforts were made by President Jones) to avoid a crisis in this affair.

Anyway the problem is not to judge the affair (the Cabinet took a decision and you, I, must to respect this decision) but to avoid that such a situation will not occur again. And in this goal, I consider that the Pierre's idea is a good one.



Of course you are right. But we speak of our club and in the club affairs, I consider that Compromise is the best way. This is my humble experience and you seem to be in agreement with me as you said :



Have fun

Best regards

General Lamezec
Prince et Comte de Davout
IVème Corps

My forebears thought so as well. Veto can only block things, it cannot force any positive or negative change. How did it end? With stagnation and fall.

_________________
Marechal d'Empire Dominik Derwinski
Grand Maréchal du Palais de la Maison de l'Empereur
La Grande Armée

Marechal Derwinski, you must be referring to the Liberum Veto, a catastrophic legislative rule of the old Polish Diet.

_________________
Feldmarschall Jeff Freiherr Mathes von Krain
50th (Stein) Infantry Regiment
Dritte Brigade
Austrian Korps

That's right. Veto is bad. One person's right to say "no" overrides the decision of all others. Democracy, being a tyranny of the majority, is way better.

_________________
Marechal d'Empire Dominik Derwinski
Grand Maréchal du Palais de la Maison de l'Empereur
La Grande Armée

And I am happy to say there is no veto in the NWC Cabinet. We have 5 equal members.

Battle On....

A veto can be used and limited. Certain members could have veto power, but the veto can be set to be overturned by a vote of all members and (say) a 2/3 majority or a 100% vote of the non-vetoing members is required to overturn a veto.

This gives certain (or all) members of the group the ability to stop a measure, but does allow for a check on that veto power.

_________________
Ernie Sands
1ère Brigade of 2ème Division de Grosse Cavalerie, Réserve de Cavalerie
de la Grande Armée
President, Colonial Campaigns Club

I think I understand now what occured between Chuck and Paco in one part and President Jones in other part. In fact their approachs are very different. President Jones thought to the club when Chuck and Paco thought french army. This is the key, I think.
For simple officers like me, the question is just to know if we want team work, more and more power in President hands or if we prefer the traditional approach, army by army, adopted since the begining of the club.
As I am a veteran, former french CIC, you will understand that I am in favour of the second approach. The recent vote in the Cabinet and the change initiated after Paco and Chuck resignation seem to give the majority to the first one.

Whatever the way the club will follow, have fun ! but don't let anyone choose the way you want the club follows

Just my thoughts

Best regards

General Lamezec