INS Reports: Trouble in TS-Paradise for new delegate Escade

[Glen-Rhodes]

Did you purposely omit the fact where Escade asked to talk to you before you posted the statement?

No, I didn't purposefully omit that. I don't believe Escade would have said anything useful during that discussion, but the fact of the matter is that I was traveling during the whole ordeal. I wrote my statement offline and posted it as soon as I had an internet connection, so I did not see this request until after the fact. Escade and I both had a conservation afterwards, in which I recognized I should have checked the Cabinet forum beforehand and subsequently spoke with Escade. However, I doubt anything Escade could say would have changed my mind.

And that I told you before you posted the statement that I felt that the action would be worthy of recall?

The problem, SB, is that this is classic intimidating and coercion. What you did is the kind of behavior I'm speaking out against. You shouldn't be giving ultimatums to other Cabinet members as a way to silence their dissent.

And most importantly, the only attempt I was following of Escade's to fix the situation was blocked by you resigning hours before the cabinet meeting. The victim card you keep trying to play only works when you omit the multiple times people tried to avoid/fix the issue that was ignored or sabotaged by you.

This is a complete rewrite of history. Escade and I had extensive conversations over IRC, Skype, and PMs. We both reached an agreement, which entailed a policy of managed public dissent and an apology from myself. I had written out the apology and sent it to her for approval. At the last minute, Escade sent me a message saying she'd changed the deal after talking with the Cabinet. She did so after guaranteeing the deal was rock solid and that she would convince Hileville and the rest of the Cabinet that it was the best way forward. She did nothing of the sort, completely reversed the deal, and tried to sell it to me as a compromise, even though it was simply the status quo. That is why I resigned. At that moment, it was clear that no matter what came of my conversations with Escade, other Cabinet members would stonewall everything. Every time Escade and I seemed to reach an agreement, she would come back and say that she's changed her mind because of what other people told her.

[South Pacific Belschaft]

This is a complete rewrite of history. Escade and I had extensive conversations over IRC, Skype, and PMs. We both reached an agreement, which entailed a policy of managed public dissent and an apology from myself. I had written out the apology and sent it to her for approval. At the last minute, Escade sent me a message saying she'd changed the deal after talking with the Cabinet. She did so after guaranteeing the deal was rock solid and that she would convince Hileville and the rest of the Cabinet that it was the best way forward. She did nothing of the sort, completely reversed the deal, and tried to sell it to me as a compromise, even though it was simply the status quo. That is why I resigned. At that moment, it was clear that no matter what came of my conversations with Escade, other Cabinet members would stonewall everything. Every time Escade and I seemed to reach an agreement, she would come back and say that she's changed her mind because of what other people told her.

You forget that as merely first among equals the Delegate cannot guarantee something without talking to the Cabinet. Escade may have thought she could persuade the others to agree, but clearly she could not. Disagreeing with something does not equate to Stonewalling, and if two thirds of the Cabinet oppose something then it won't happen.

[Hileville]

Since I'm being painted as this evil change stopper I will note I never had a conversation with anyone about the compromise and/or policy you and Escade discussed.

[Glen-Rhodes]

You forget that as merely first among equals the Delegate cannot guarantee something without talking to the Cabinet. Escade may have thought she could persuade the others to agree, but clearly she could not. Disagreeing with something does not equate to Stonewalling, and if two thirds of the Cabinet oppose something then it won't happen.

I didn't forget that. I was very skeptical of Escade's ability to get others in line, and I told her as much in our conversations. What drove me to resign was that there was a clear lack of leadership during the crisis. She made promises she couldn't keep, and each time there was the slightest resistance, I would be shafted by whatever changes she had made to our agreements. To me, it seemed that there was no willingness to mend things among the other Cabinet members, so I didn't see the point in sticking around. Even if I had won my recall, which was about 50/50, there would be no working relationship -- especially with you admins blocking my access to the Cabinet altogether. So why not let Escade have a Chair she can work with?

Since I'm being painted as this evil change stopper I will note I never had a conversation with anyone about the compromise and/or policy you and Escade discussed.

I'm going by what she told me, and you were the only personally specifically named (the other people were simply "citizens") when she told me why she did a 180 on the managed public dissent policy we came up with. I can't remember exactly if you posted in the thread (and can't go back and check, since somebody hid the thread), but I seem to recall you opposing the agreement outright.