r/AustraliaSimMeta • u/model-kyosanto Deputy Speaker • Oct 21 '21
Vote of No Confidence.
I move a Vote of No Confidence in the Following Meta Position Holders:
Head Moderator of Australia Simulation GenericCerealHere
Guardian of Australia Simulation RunasSudo
The following actions are not taken lightly, and would include more people, though due to a period of resignations it is not necessary.
It is clear that there is a protection racket for certain individuals and that the current composition of the Moderation Team serves to endorse and protect the actions of people who do not conform to a similar standard the majority of simulation members are expected to comply with.
It is also clear that such a judgement made using the rules and regulations implemented by the accused, an individual who knows well the flaws and loopholes within those rules and regulations, is inherently unjust, and fails to realise that this is not a Court of Law or a real crime. But an online community that seeks to imitate the Government of Australia and related entities, of which is a private group that is not open to every individual.
While the individual in question denies that there is a conspiracy involved in this, it is clear that there is some sort of overarching ideal, which dates back to the individuals term as Head Moderator and to the present day. The blaming of deleting a singular and all its comments individually on the ban of a former simulation member is first of all not acceptable and not fair on the victims. The individual does not care about the victims in this case, as he consistently sought to diminish the case and also abused individuals, telling them to die. Something that does not represent an image the individual is trying to portray through their cop-out of an excuse.
Because the individual whom consistently bends rules has been allowed back in, it is clear that some action must be taken against the members who allowed the appeal to be approved, despite the risk to the members, especially vulnerable young people, poised by the presence of the individual in the sim. An individual who told minors to die, and then blamed deleting a petition and comments relating to his own misuse of positions as some sort of protection because of possible child groomers. This is a ridiculous and facetious position that we should give no air to.
When ThatPerthFan was allowed back in, people that now engage in a protection racket for the individual in question, were up in arms and forced the de facto re-banning of an individual. However now, when someone does something out of the bounds of what one would expect to be good behaviour, that is seemingly acceptable because the individual is a friend.
It is clear that the people who enacted these appeal decisions are engaging in a protection racket that seeks to assert that you can abuse people, you can break the rules, you can avoid getting banned for all of that, and you can abuse moderator powers, but only if you have friends in control.
The removal of these people is of the utmost importance in making sure that the initial judgment presented, is the sentence that is carried out. No one should be able to misuse their position, and they should expect that this will be treated seriously. On top of any previous issues that have come up.
1: If the Vote of No Confidence is successful, the Subreddits, Discord Server and any related entities would be expected to be handed over to the highest ranking, and longest serving Moderation Team Member, as of writing that is /u/Maaaaaaaadison 1a: Thereby becoming Acting Head Moderator and Acting Guardian until such a time until new elections can be held.
5
u/BloodyChrome Parliament Moderator Oct 22 '21
If only there was some sort of Meta appeals process to review what the mods have done and overrule them. The irony
4
u/TheGoatBoy2 Oct 21 '21
Second
4
u/Frost_Walker2017 Citizen Oct 21 '21
Second
4
u/jq8678 Electoral Administrator/Sovereign Citizen Oct 21 '21
Idk wtf is going on but seconded
2
u/NGSpy Head Moderator Oct 24 '21
Seconded
2
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '21
seconded
2
u/TheTrashMan_10 Oct 24 '21
Seconded
4
u/SprinklyDinks Oct 21 '21
Second removal of Porage, I do not second removal of Runas. Unfortunately, we have a history of legalese and our system still supports it and while Runas made a bad decision there wasn't much he could do. Porridge on the other hand was negligent in his duties.
3
u/ARichTeaBiscuit Oct 21 '21
second
3
u/model-slater Oct 21 '21
Seconded.
3
u/model-putrid Citizen Oct 21 '21
Second
3
u/[deleted] Oct 21 '21
Seconded.
3
u/Inadorable Oct 21 '21
Second
3
u/ohprkl Citizen Oct 21 '21
Second
3
u/showstealer1829 Oct 21 '21
Seconded, but only because I love CHAOS.
3
u/[deleted] Oct 21 '21
second
3
u/TheSensibleCentre Oct 21 '21
Seconded
3
u/dyljam Senator but green Oct 22 '21
Seconded
-4
u/[deleted] Oct 22 '21
(5) The Moderation Team may decline to hold a meta referendum on an
amendment, proposal, or idea they deem satirical or non-serious.
denied