I am here to nominate @A_mean_old_man to his pre-delegate position of vizier. Over his many long years of service to our region he has been a boon, especially as a member of the security body. I feel this is the gold standard for a Vizier, and I am happy to put his nomination forward for you to discuss.
Further, I think that dedication and attention to detail is exactly what we should expect in an Arbiter as well, so I am also nominating him for Arbiter.
Please ask the candidate any questions you may have
(note for the Provost Office: I believe that while this will require two votes, it should be fine to utilize the same nomination thread. Please let me know if this is wrong and I will split the nominations into two threads, thank you )
If you told me in 2012 we’d be renominating AMOM as Vizier after a Delegate stint yet again in 2026, I’d have thought you were crazy. No way I’d still be doing this more than a decade later. And yet, here we are.
There are a lot of takeaways from the above, some less disturbing than others, but one of them is that this is a well deserved nomination.
I wholeheartedly support AMOM’s return to the Praesidium. Like, duh. Get him back in there already!
However, I find the Arbiter nomination interesting. I’d like to hear AMOM’s reasoning for accepting the nomination and an outline of how you plan to approach court business, both in terms of overall philosophy and any concrete plans or ideas you may have. You’ve always struck me as more of a dynamic political executioner, not someone who would enjoy sitting around hearing cases and entertaining lawyer RP.
I echo Cretox’s curiosity: AMOM for Arbiter? Really?.. I mean, yes, he’s absolutely qualified. But he just rejoined our Magisterial ranks, and, as Cretox said, he’s more of a “dynamic political executioner”. Intriguing.
I will just want to formally add that I do think AMOM is a great fit for Arbiter. He’s a pretty detail oriented person when it comes to law and is a pretty dandy legislative person, although in the past year he hasn’t done as much legislative projects. I do echo the sentiment I’m not too sure if it would be AMOM’s cup of tea in terms of fun, but I trust AMOM to do the job well and if he doesn’t like it I’m pretty sure he’ll be quick to resign.
Not to say Cretox/AC’s questions aren’t good ones, but thought I’d just elaborate a bit more than funni meme.
Arbitrary reply: many of you are already very familiar with my stance on the 2022 Concrisis. Fundamentally, it was nonsense: the Conclave was never afforded the authority to rule on the Concordat’s own legitimacy by any version of the constitution, before or after it was “repealed and replaced”, which should have been acknowledged as an amendment, albeit semantically erroneous. The Conclave could not make the ruling that it attempted to make and could not dictate its prescribed rollback of our government to a time before its members’ own appointments. The ruling was the closest thing I can imagine to a rogue court attempting to destroy the regional government and sow chaos here, and perhaps that’s what it was. I suspect two members of the court at the time were grappling with feelings of negativity towards our government and community, which had largely revered and elevated them beforehand - feelings which were demonstrated by their words, attitudes, and actions following the ruling’s release. It did not seem grounded in reason or reality. It seemed driven, rather, by impression, and by ego.
While the Arbiters were not wrong in that a mechanism for “repealing and replacing” the Concordat did not exist, the action followed all process and procedure of a constitutional amendment, and in any sane mind would, therefore, be considered an amendment. A simple commentary on the importance of proper diction would have been enough. The court did not have the authority to attempt what it attempted, which was an action of wanton and possibly malicious attempted destruction of years of our labor, an attempt at executing dictatorial authority over the entire government from a position which was not granted this authority, and an attempted erasure of our government’s development and progress after the 2019 coup. There’s a word for this act somewhere in our laws - but obviously, it will not be my place to accuse or prosecute such things if I am appointed.
My overall philosophy should be compatible with Conclave service. Political executioner and occasional interregional criminal though I may be (sometimes Rahls must be infiltrated. I believe in TEP’s laws, not theirs - and they certainly didn’t believe in TEP’s laws ), my behavior in TEP has always been within the limitations of the law, and to the end of holding others accountable to those limits. And the technical limitations and literal interpretation of the law and the powers it affords us are what must be considered by the court. I dispute the claim made in the final sentence with the lawyer RP that I myself have often engaged in: the Jo trial, the Python trial, my initiation of trials against Badger & Halo, as well as whatever I’ve done in The South Pacific, historically (trying to remember if I tried Unibot there or if it was somewhere else), as well as with my legislative nitpicking - I have frequently hunted for imperfections and loopholes in the laws, either to fix them myself or task the Magisterium with handling them. I have also created entirely new laws when there was a void that was wanting (see pundoc, for example, when ROs were able to ban residents for virtually any reason and these actions were going undocumented). In fact, the vast majority of my experience on NS has centered around meticulous legal crafting, even if I’m more recognized for opinion pieces, flashy take-downs, and PR spin doctoring. These are less frequent activities of mine but are often more noticeable than the background work I’ve done on the law. I confess I’ve done little of this recently: yet another uptick in RL responsibilities has kneecapped me, but it won’t prevent me from handling court business and nitpicking specific laws and cases upon request.
My reasoning for accepting is simple: we’re short an Arbiter and I’m happy to lend my service to the court in this moment. It’s a very particular role, and I obviously struggled with staffing it after Libertanny left. I can do the job and will do so with an interpretation of the Concordat that holds its word as the singular Law above laws, and an interpretation of the laws that holds their literal word above any intangibles, but isn’t so maniacal that it would NOT interpret “repeal and replace” as an amendment and would go miles off-script to try to revert & restructure the government. I understand the limitations of the court because they’re clearly written into the constitution.
As for concrete plans, there’s not too much required. Business tends to come to you, as an Arbiter. However, if I reread the SOC after being admitted and discover a pile of slop, I don’t think I’ll be able to help myself from proposing changes to the other Arbiters. I tend to react more than I tend to plan, and I’ve found this works well for me.
Due to the passage of both votes contained within [N-2026-17/18] Nomination of A mean old man as Vizier and Arbiter, this topic has been closed in accordance with the Standing Orders of the Magisterium. If further discussion on these matters are desired, please contact a member of the Office of the Provost to unlock this topic.
)
), my behavior in TEP has always been within the limitations of the law, and to the end of holding others accountable to those limits. And the technical limitations and literal interpretation of the law and the powers it affords us are what must be considered by the court. I dispute the claim made in the final sentence with the lawyer RP that I myself have often engaged in: the Jo trial, the Python trial, my initiation of trials against Badger & Halo, as well as whatever I’ve done in The South Pacific, historically (trying to remember if I tried Unibot there or if it was somewhere else), as well as with my legislative nitpicking - I have frequently hunted for imperfections and loopholes in the laws, either to fix them myself or task the Magisterium with handling them. I have also created entirely new laws when there was a void that was wanting (see pundoc, for example, when ROs were able to ban residents for virtually any reason and these actions were going undocumented). In fact, the vast majority of my experience on NS has centered around meticulous legal crafting, even if I’m more recognized for opinion pieces, flashy take-downs, and PR spin doctoring. These are less frequent activities of mine but are often more noticeable than the background work I’ve done on the law. I confess I’ve done little of this recently: yet another uptick in RL responsibilities has kneecapped me, but it won’t prevent me from handling court business and nitpicking specific laws and cases upon request.