Call of No Confidence in GhengisFarb.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

In the last two turns my leadership has become more of a detriment to the team than an asset and I believe the Glorious Warmonger nation would fare far better under someone else's guidance. I therefore call for a No Confidence vote in myself.

In addition to discussion in the vote of No Confidence discussion and nominations for candidates is germane in this thread as well.

SUPPORTING REASONS FOR A VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE:
GhengisFarb's deviation from the constitution's delegation of power, he has overstepped his authority in the use of the Workers as described in the Constitution.

Loss of entire force on the continent of GS and Vox.

[Master Zen]

Before I make a decision, I would also like to hear what others have to say.

I can only mention that I believe most of us hold you Ghengis in their highest regards. Mistakes have been made, yes, but we cannot hope to be perfect. If anything, we have a lot to owe to your leadership the fact that The Glory of War is a feared and respected nation, and has in its hands the potential to sway in its favor the future of the world.

I would like to know if there are any other reasons for this, are you to busy to fullfill your duties? If that is so, then I'm sure someone will gladly step up to lead this nation.

If this is not the reason, the perhaps rather than laying blame on yourself, you learn from your mistakes and ensure they are not repeated. This for me is much more admirable than stepping down at the sight of the first adversity.

Anyways, that is only my point of view.

[UnOrthOdOx]

I agree with much of Master Zen's statement.

If you are feeling a need to step down either from burn out, or RL issues, let us know, I am sure I could devote more time here, though you all would likely not like my strict hand very much...

Otherwise, I feel you are doin an admirable job, and should continue if you WANT and if you CAN.

[Hot_Enamel]

The only reason I would vote "yea", is if you didnt want it, or you have other RL commitments.

The only thing that is lacking from our entire team is greater detail on our strategies.

If we want the workforce to improve the palace...then let's discuss the pros/cons, and make a decision.

We all had plenty of time to express our concerns about our war strategy. As a team, we gambled, and lost our horsemen. Let's now discuss if this is the best method to continue our war.

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

I think many here can testify that I am more than willing to argue and fight my way through an issue if I don't agree with someone else. However, I do not have any desire to be a tyrant and force my belief on others when the majority wants to go another direction.

That is the case here. When we started it was my idea that this was supposed to be an experiment in decentralized gameplay with several independent principalities working towards common objectives, however it appears to be changing into a centralized system with a less autonomy for the prinipalities.

I find myself in the position of Ben Franklin when the Constitution was introduced and he was a fervent supporter of States Rights. For me to remain as leader means that I will constantly be at odds with the rest of the team that wants to go with a centralized system. I cannot see how that will be good for our future and I am giving the team a chance to choose an alternate leader.

If the No Confidence vote fails then I will play my part and act the Tyrant and continue on in my bullheaded way. If it succeeds, then I will retire and continue on as CoW and offer advice.

(Also, today I had gone through the entire save and put in everyone's build queus only to be faced with having to redo the turn because of a change in one worker's actions. )

[Jon Shafer]

I can take over the team.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

If the No Confidence vote fails then I will play my part and act the Tyrant and continue on in my bullheaded way. If it succeeds, then I will retire and continue on as CoW and offer advice.

Here's where you're wrong. You are taking two extremes here: being a tyrant and retiring. A true tyrant does not admit his failures. A true leader does. All you have to do is take the middle ground here, make and defend your points, but expect to be overruled by the majority from time to time. I'm sure that if you can go so far as to be willing to retire for a few wrong actions, you can be more than capable of being less "bullheaded" and "tyranical" as you say.

I for one have great trust in you and believe you can pull it off and I'm sure most of us agree. If had a bad leader we would have all lost interest in this game long ago...

BTW, I also second what Hot_Enamel says, part of the blame is OUR fault for not caring more for some things. Sometimes ideas are posted and they are mostly ignored. If we expect GF to change, we cannot expect less from ourselves.

-MZ

[Aggie]

Ghengis, I see you as the embodiment of our warmonger ways. It is is only natural that our leader be slightly less democratic than in other groups. I suggest the job is your as long as you desire it.
Aggie

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Trip
I can take over the team.

You are desperate....

[Hot_Enamel]

There must be a joke somewhere with GF being our bullheaded CoW...



I am voting Nay.

[Aro]

Nay.

[Donegeal]

* Donegeal resists the temptation to RP his sucsess in Regaining GoW *

"Being responsible means pissing people off."

It comes with the turf GF, and you have handled it well.

[UnOrthOdOx]

GF, I don't think you are the only one who was a bit surprised at the centralization of workers. I myself thought we were going to each have our own set of workers to deal with, a feudalistic society.

However, rules are not set in stone, laws can change. Perhaps it is time to see what the people truly want?

As for the CoIA, yes, we need SOME centralization, perhaps he is allowed to comandeer workers or is allowed x # of workers and all slaves for Imperial needs....

[Panzer32]

The big issue here is the workers, which is the main thing that (in the constitution) the CoIA does.

GhengisFarb, you have still not told me your 'plan' for improving the lands around the palace. I thought, when I made the 10-turn worker plan, that it would be pretty close to what you were thinking, from what you had said in earlier posts.

What I would like to see workers become: I still want workers centralized under the CoIA. This gives more organization, and benefits the empire as a whole. What I was starting to implement was a system where city Kings would request various tiles to be improved. If they produced a worker, the request(s) would be fufilled quickly. If they didn't, they would have to wait for either a slave, or a worker from another city that had improved that city to the max or logical limit. Therefore, the workers are under the Kings' indirect control.

As for your second reason, its just garbage. It was not you who lost the horsemen.

I withold my vote as of now, to see how this will go.

[=OttomusCeasar=]

I for one see a disadvantage in the centralized worker proposal. If a city lord builds a worker he loses one pop and all the production revenue it was generating from the tile it worked.

Under the original system the lord had to weigh the advantage gained from improved tiles with the disadvantage of a lost pop.

Under the centralized system it all lose, the lord loses a pop and doesn't retain control of the worker. We had originally proposed that the central government could mandate that specific cities produce workers or settlers or units for the state (as apparently happened with GF telling several of the cities they had to cough up settlers) and these would be the central governments. I find it kinda sad that we never gave that system a test run.

And I'm willing to take control of a city if there are any left, but feel free to give them to others first as I can wait.