Petition for Impeachment

Discussion/Information about the Duchy of Thor's Refuge

Moderators: ravenb, Collin the Red

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Azus » Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:35 pm

With all the high emotions up there, I think asking an outside opinion would be good, even it's outside the ombudsman's position normal stated duties. If he's willing to help moderate and offer oversight while you folks do the main work of allthings and evidence and impeachment, awesome! The worst Sir Goldcrest can do is say no and that it's not part of his scope.

But the amount of bickering going on, I suspect that if Porkins, saying he's doing his best to be fair and impartial, says that Ka'a has been abrupt and tactless but has not bullied anyone, someone will cry foul and bring up charges of bias. If there's a moderator overseeing Porkins, even if Porkins says the exact same thing, I suspect there will be far less cry of bias. Folks, your emotions are running hot enough I think you all need a cool head to assist.




TLDR: shush about if it's the Ombudsman's proper place, and ask for a mediator anyway.
User avatar
Azus
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:10 pm

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Randy » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:10 pm

Azus wrote:With all the high emotions up there, I think asking an outside opinion would be good, even it's outside the ombudsman's position normal stated duties. If he's willing to help moderate and offer oversight while you folks do the main work of allthings and evidence and impeachment, awesome! The worst Sir Goldcrest can do is say no and that it's not part of his scope.y.


In my opinion, going outside the lifelines is a bit pre-mature. There are plenty of people in Westmarch that should be able to provide an unbiased opinion. Sir Keluric, Sir Deimos, Dame Gwendair, just to name a few. While Sir Goldcrest is certainly an option, I think WM should be able to do an internal investigation and provide all the facts to the populace. Should a mediator be required, there are plenty of people with a vast amount of conflict resolution skills available.

sirnakita wrote:Please provide the location in the corpora where the Kingdom monarch has the authority to impede a local land action. I did a search and there is no mention of the Kingdom's authority over local land issues unless there is a violation of the corpora.


I don't believe his majesty is impeding a the actions being taken in Thors Refuge. I think what he's trying to do is follow my suggestion that if someone is impeached for being a bully, then they should be suspended as well. For my part, I'm suggesting that if your not calling for a suspension, did the accused actions actually warrant the term bullying? Finally, when your apart of a Kingdom any action taken or not taken by a park is under the purview of said Kingdom. Thors Refuge is not a missile silo independent of all other California parks, we are responsible to each other to ensure the Kingdom of Westmarch is considered one of the most respected Kingdoms in Amtgard. To do that, we sometimes have to verify that disagreements among players don't become headline news on e-sam.
User avatar
Randy
 
Posts: 1583
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:16 pm
Location: Silver Sun

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Porkins » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:14 pm

I think getting the ombudsman involved is a little much, not to mention we have elected officials to do just this sort of thing.
While I personally would be loath to investigate it and would probably hand it off to the GMR and the next highest member uninvolved and work with their assessment, that whole process is up to me. I can choose to disregard it or let the ole magic 8 ball decide, in which case I would be a bad monarch worthy of impeachment myself, or I could have a non biased member ,as well as a person for and against it looking on, look into it and give a report along with suggestions and come to a well thought out explainable appraisal of the solution and follow up plan that is likewise all made available to the public.

The problem here is that by not bringing the problem to the monarchy in the first place it disregards my ability to be good at my job. Which I can totally understand and have no problems with, if it wasn't for the fact that I am the King and have the pride and obligation to act justly and that assuming the worst of me is like assuming the worst of the Kingdom at large. Which ,much like throwing my sammich on the floor, is definitely one of my buttons.

Damn, evil Randy beat me to posting.Also yes, I fully expect the Athing to move forward but bullying it not something that gets voted, Misconduct unbecoming of an officer? that sounds appropriate, if that is what was meant than I would change it. If it was meant as bullying then I have the GMR ready to investigate.
In times like these, it's helpful to remember that there have always been times like these- Paul Harvey
User avatar
Porkins
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:40 am

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby GoldCrest » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:34 pm

Could the Ombudsman get involved? Sure.
Should the Ombudsman get involved? Maybe
Should you give your officers (at all levels) an opportunity to resolve the matter? Definitely

Based off of what limited information I've found it looks like anonymity is not an issue. Also, attempts are being made to resolve the matter through the formal channels. That makes me think its best to let the process work. I'm happy to assist as the process unfolds but, at least for the time being, it looks like things are on the appropriate track and the one I would have encouraged be used. I appreciate everyone's faith in the Ombudsman program. The ultimate goal though is to help players help themselves. If you feel there is a problem, please feel free to contact me at ombudsman@amtgard.com.

I stand ready to assist, however if possible, I implore you to give your officers the opportunity to address your concerns.

GoldCrest
Amtgard Ombudsman
GoldCrest
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 6:55 pm

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Orko » Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:28 pm

GoldCrest wrote:Could the Ombudsman get involved? Sure.
Should the Ombudsman get involved? Maybe
Should you give your officers (at all levels) an opportunity to resolve the matter? Definitely

Based off of what limited information I've found it looks like anonymity is not an issue. Also, attempts are being made to resolve the matter through the formal channels. That makes me think its best to let the process work. I'm happy to assist as the process unfolds but, at least for the time being, it looks like things are on the appropriate track and the one I would have encouraged be used. I appreciate everyone's faith in the Ombudsman program. The ultimate goal though is to help players help themselves. If you feel there is a problem, please feel free to contact me at ombudsman@amtgard.com.

I stand ready to assist, however if possible, I implore you to give your officers the opportunity to address your concerns.

GoldCrest
Amtgard Ombudsman


+1 for optimistic brevity.
Image
User avatar
Orko
▇ ▅ █ ▅ ▇ ▂ ▃ ▁ ▁ ▅ ▃ ▅
 
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 9:37 pm
Location: Thor's Refuge i.e. The Place To Be

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby TB » Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:40 am

She has been accused of bullying which has made multiple members feel uncomfortable and has pushed at least 2 members away from the park.


So this represents the bullying charge. What about the other charges? The dereliction of duty, the corpora violation that states she is affecting the land as a whole? Two people do not represent the land as a whole.

If the people who wanted to bring this forth have really put effort and thought into it they should be able to provide evidence and instances for all the charges.

I am really thinking this is in fact people that were bored and got caught with their hands in the cookie jar (just using this a generic term) now attempting to shift blame/get retribution against the person that they see as the perceived oppressor.

Please post the facts, list of actual charges, names, dates, violations of the corpora committed by the monarch so that those of us that cannot attend the all thing can make informed decisions about this impeachment. I wish to put effort and thought into my decision.

TB
It's shameful.
Why can't people who dress in costumes and fight with toy weapons comport themselves with more maturity? - Asmund
TB
Terrible Bard
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:05 pm

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Porkins » Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:34 pm

So here is where we seem to be;
We have a petition to impeach a Monarch and no discussion or bit of evidence as to why. We have a claim for bullying but no information has presented and the Kingdom Monarch and GMR are still waiting for any information to come forward from the local officers or even people who signed the petition. Repeated request have been made for more information ,both to have discussion and so that proxy voters could be reasonably able to make an informed decision. I do not find it an acceptable precedent to make claims and exclude people who have to proxy vote from having even a minimal grasp of what is being voted on.

Because the issue so far has not been resolved I am stepping in and having the vote pushed back to the May althing. Discussion should still be held on the 6th and I will take notes for those who are not able to be present. I will remove names from it and present it here in an unbiased fashion, so that people may look and discuss the charges instead of having to rely on their own speculation. I believe this is best for both sides and necessary so that voters can make an informed decision.

If anybody has any concerns or questions, I am available.
In times like these, it's helpful to remember that there have always been times like these- Paul Harvey
User avatar
Porkins
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:40 am

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Porkins » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:23 am

I took notes on the letter but It was also posted so here it is for discussion.
Katnchains wrote:I apologize for the delay in posting but cable outages and real life happen.
We have decided to not proceed with the impeachment process. The time remaining until the end of term combined with the timelines proscribed by the corpora do not make it feasible.
This does not mean that our charges were groundless, slandering or completely biased. I am posting the information that I had to base my decisions upon, for you to make your decisions about.
Some of the other members have sent me their info as well.
I request a rebuttal from Ka'a and Ka'a alone. This drama needs to end and her voice should be the last one to be heard.
I have several attachments to support my claims. These attachments are available here: https://drive.google.com/folderview...

First I believe Ka'a is guilty of Derelicition of Duty. In the Corpora 4 weeks in a row is grounds for an automatic vote for impeachment. While Ka'a missed all of Feb except 1 meet she has had a pattern of absences that is continuing.
I have outlined this in the document Attendance.docx.

Second I believe Ka'a has created a hostile environment for some people at the park and that number has grown as her reign continues.
Before she was even coroneted Ka'a chose to pick up the fight over the face book page. A fight which she was well aware the populace of the park did not want to occur, and felt had reached a bullying level already. I contacted her in an attempt to mediate some peace in the subject. I was left with the impression that there was an agenda at play which had more to do with needing the admin rights then the stated reasons. I was concerned based on her statement "But the atmosphere it creates in the park is damaging. We're already seeing it now" that there may be an attempt made to ban Lady T based on the Code of Conduct bullet 6. This face book fight was following a 6 month reign by Porkins which contained a noticeable number of procedural oddities that only affected Lady T. I contacted Lady T and warned her that she needed to be careful. Well from there it spread like wildfire. But I stand by my concerns and I did not discuss the issue with anyone until they had already approached me with knowledge of the event.
Following this first Lady T was required to turn in the newsletter for editorial approval and then she was stripped of the newsletter publishing altogether. The newsletter had never had oversight before and no one else had ever expressed an interest in publishing the newsletter.
Continuing special rules were developed for any recruiting or demo activities that Lady T organized. For the first time in 5 years the TR group that did a weekend long demo at All Hallows Faire received no credits because it was not approved ahead of time even though the event had been planned for a year.
Then suddenly contracts were required where they had never been used before and all contracts had to go thru Ka'a. A contract was demanded for Great Escapes to use their room and tables for A&S while holding TR harmless for any damages. While understandable in concept you can't demand things like this from vendors that have sponsored numerous events and happily hosted the A&S evenings for years for FREE. The opportunity arose for TR to march in the Christmas Parade thru downtown Sac. Ka'a was involved in the contract negotiations, which were ongoing, but she decided that it was a bad idea, without discussion with the park, and told Lady T to shut down the project. Some members of TR have even said they were told to not attend the parade when it became apparent that the parade would continue as a Misty Vale/Clan MacAbee hosted event.
The conflict about propane in the park is another example of Ka'a stopping Lady T and Collin before they were finished and now everyone will suffer for it. I was standing in the conversation circle the day the park patrol guy came and told us to turn off the propane. I specifically heard Ka'a ask Lady T and Collin to talk with their contacts at the park district and find out what was going on. Lady T agreed to do so. The next week I was walking from the chairs to the cars when I heard Ka'a ask Lady T if she had any updates. I heard Lady T explain about the people by the baseball fields damaging the park leading to the ban. I also heard her say that the Park supervisor they were working with was helping them develop a more specific contract that would allow our group to get our propane back since we were at the park so frequently. Things would be added like small propane containers, no vehicles, and any other distinguishing features. But there hadn't reached agreement on propane with pop-ups yet. So it was a surprise when it was announced that Porkins received definitive No. See chat. If Ka'a knew the MacAbee's were working on the problem and was asking for updates where did the breakdown between her and Porkins occur? At this point we don't get propane anymore.
This sticklerness about contracts can be contrasted by the Darkshore contract discussions on CAamtgard in the Westmarch BOD site.
The hostilities are not confined to Lady T. Several people have had the displeasure of public dressing downs in front of the parks members for perceived offenses. The most serious and recent of these was March 9th. Kalevra was starting a battlegame when Ka'a, Etah and Porkins rolled up and hopped out of their cars. They approached the players and told the players that it was time to conduct a V8 playtest. There was no posting except for a schedule at the beginning of the reign, not exhaustive communication.
Players protested since they had a battlegame that was literally a walk to the field away from starting and TR had already participated in V8 playtesting. Things became hotter until Kalevra mediated the compromise that the battlegame would proceed with the proscribed V8 playtest immediately afterwards. Ka'a took Kalevra to what I'm sure she assumed was a safe distance and then dressed him down for interrupting the Monarchy while they are speaking. Unfortunately for Ka'a it either was not far enough or quiet enough because there were many witnesses. This had a very negative effect on the remaining morale of many folks as Kalevra was one of Ka'a's most staunch supporters.

Third I assert that Ka'a has overstepped the authority of her position as monarch of TR. The populace of Thor's Refuge voted to allow the freehold of Misty Vale to form in May. There has been no action by the people of TR to change that vote yet Ka'a took it upon herself to contact Burning Lands to try to get the contract for Misty Vale revoked. In the process she so annoyed the representative for the Burning Lands BOD that she questioned whether the Westmarch contract should be signed. This action was taken to curtail Lady T's access to the Ork and to shut down Misty Vale once and for all. Again here was an action targeted at a specific member of TR. The transcripts of the chats between the BL BOD Rep, Diana Windsor, was provided by Diana Windsor and is in the files broken down by the person she was chatting with. The chats have not been edited for content in any way and I'm sure Diana Windsor would be willing verify that.

With all that I have asserted I would like to assert one more thing. I believe Ka’a is a great person and a wonderful asset to amtgard and a park with the caveat that her leadership style needs polishing and might not ever mesh well with the less autocratic environment of Thor’s Refuge. She is a fantastic crafter, has great ideas for fund raisers and such, and I firmly believe she operates from what she believes to be the best interests of the park.
Kat
In times like these, it's helpful to remember that there have always been times like these- Paul Harvey
User avatar
Porkins
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:40 am

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Porkins » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:07 pm

While due do necessary neutrality I wont comment on the letter, the althing item for impeachment will still have to be voted on. Once received, proper procedure dictates that the resolution is to be by voting. Making exceptions with something as serious as impeachment is another precedent that should not be made.
In times like these, it's helpful to remember that there have always been times like these- Paul Harvey
User avatar
Porkins
 
Posts: 622
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 12:40 am

Benevolent Tyranny in Our Modern Medieval Society

Postby Etah » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:21 pm

I said I would post yesterday but I wanted to mull it over for a day. The first thing I wanted to say is that I wouldn't have even stuck my nose in this at all if Kat didn’t decide mention my name and then proceed to get everything about that event totally wrong. So I figured, what the hell, in for a penny, in for a pound. I’m also a fairly neutral third party because it has been some time since I have been part of this land but I’m close enough to the land to have pretty much watched every single one of these events happen on some level.

I will first address Nakita’s post since it was fairly short and then I will address the key things that Kat mentioned, in what I hope will not become a small book.

Nakita

The first thing to mention is that you used words like antagonistic, belligerent, pointed, dismissive and confrontational. These are subjective words that are prejudicial and are used to make pathos (emotionally) based claims, rather than logos (logically) based claims.

You said that Ka’a made a unilateral decision to reject the Parade contract without letting Thor’s Refuge BOD review it. The problem is that you do not seem to understand the verbiage in the corpora or the scope of the BOD. The corpora says that the BOD reviews contractual obligations, not that they get to review potential contracts. In fact the Corpora says that the Board of Directors is specifically forbidden from having jurisdiction over local chapter functions. Participating in the parade would most defiantly be a local chapter function. You are calling Ka’a out for being a local monarch and making a call that local monarchs are supposed to make.

You mentioned that with Darkshore’s Paperwork, she was reluctant to request paperwork. I get that you are trying to draw comparisons between the Christmas parade and Darkshore paperwork, but any such comparisons are wholly fallacious. Darkshore is a Kingdom level event where she is the BOD President and the autocrats have been appointed by the prior monarchy. Unless and until the Westmarch BOD incurs contractual obligations, there is no right to DEMAND to see the contract. It also bears to mention that the verbiage in the Corpora is review, meaning the BOD has no authority to deny contacts that I can find.

You said that in the Facebook discussion about “the meeting,” Ka’a exerted authority outside of what is allowed by the Corpora. What the corpora says is that the monarch presides over all official functions and ceremonies. You were organizing a meeting of chapter members to discuss “problems at the park.” That is logically, necessarily, an official function of the park. Once again, Ka’a was well within her rights as monarch to make that decision.

I respectfully disagree with everything you wrote for the above reasons.
Kat

My biggest problem with this message is that it is rambling and incoherent. You cover all the ground that Nakita covered, winding together specifics with generalities, facts with opinions and binding them all in a general misunderstanding of what actually occurred. You randomly mention the same things multiple times throughout the message and much of what you have written is objectively, provably wrong.

I’ll start out by saying that the fact that you felt you had to say “this doesn’t mean our charges were groundless, slandering or bias” implies that your claims were groundless, libelous and/or bias.

I dislike that you tried to stifle discussion by demanding responses “from Ka’a and Ka’a alone.” This seems like an attempt to isolate her and I would use it as an example of bullying.

Your repeated use of phrases such as “the populace of the park” “some members of TR” and “several people” are too general to be serious claims and constitute a disingenuous attempt to imply that you speak for more than the 9 people that signed that petition. To be clear, you do not speak for Thor’s Refuge; you speak for the 9 people that wrote their name on that document.

You mention the “propane Issue.” You are angry that Porkins in his proper role as Liaison of the Thor’s Refuge Board of Directors contacted the Fair Oaks Park District and asked if there was a contract or waiver that could be signed to allow Thor’s Refuge to use propane and was told no. You contend that Thor’s Refuge should have allowed a couple who were not elected or appointed to any position to deal with the superintendent of the entire park district to develop an exception that doesn’t seem to exist? I don’t really have any further comment. The problem with that line of thought should be self-evident.

You mention that there may be an attempt to ban Lady T, but you are implying that the discussion included banning Teresa from Amtgard which is disingenuous at best. The discussion involved banning her from Thor's Refuge for a short time for violations of the Amtgard Code of Conduct.

You mention that it is an oddity that Lady T was asked to turn in the newsletter for editorial approval. Since the newsletter is part of the job of the Scribe and the Scribe serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, where is her authority in the corpora that was being violated?

By procedural oddities during Porkins reign you also imply an event but don’t have the courage to directly mention it. Teresa entered several items in a Dragon Master, but was the only one to do so. Instead of saying she won a competition when there was literally no competition, the Duchy Regent DV, who is the most morally uncompromising person I have ever met AND had a net positive opinion of Teresa at the time, chose the pull the event.

Pulling the competition had nothing to do with Teresa and everything to do with there being a lack of competition. I am confident that DV would have made the same decision regardless of who that one person was. It bears to mention that Sir Randall of Dragonspine in his video conference about awards mentions that A&S awards should be awarded like Orders of the Warrior and if there is not sufficient competition, no awards should be awarded.

You are claiming that Ka’a overstepped the authority of her position as monarch of Thor’s Refuge by trying to get Mistyvales contract pulled and by curtailing Teresa’s access to the ORK. But you are mentioning that having Mistyvale's contract pulled was being discussed without including the information behind it. Teresa threatened the Prime Minister of Thor’s Refuge that if he didn't enter the credits in days rather than his corpora allowed week, she would enter the credits under access through a different park.

It bears to mention that under the ORK3 that is a credible threat. No one was trying to get Mistyvales contract pulled. Everyone was trying to figure out why a member of Thor’s Refuge in the Kingdom of Westmarch was accessing the Online Records Keeper through the Prime Minister of a nearby freeholds account. Especially since only elected officials are supposed to have access to the ORK and you cannot be a member of one park, and be in an elected position in another local park.

Here is my favorite part, the part where you mention me, for no reason at all, and then get every single fact totally and absolutely incorrect. You say we rolled up, hopped out of our car and started yelling that there would be a battle game. The truth is that we arrived hours earlier, that we arrived without all of the necessary paperwork and so the official play test was going to be canceled. We fought for a little bit, me and Kind then headed to the local Kinkos, printed out the necessary paperwork and came back. Porkins never left, so he specifically didn't “jump out of the car.”

As I walked over to Euric, Ka’a and Porkins and showed them that we had gotten the paperwork, Euric began yelling that there would be a battle game. So I figured OK, let’s get this over with since my battle game is a timed 20 minute game from start to finish. There was no mediation, I was told to wait and treated like I had done something wrong even though this had been planned since February and I had recently been in contact with the local monarch.

I was concerned that if the official v8 play test waited until the end of the day, people would leave before they had a chance to participate. After waiting for over an hour for the battle game to end, I had to leave because I had work that night. Porkins told me that only a small group of people took part in the official v8 play test and even fewer filled out the questionnaire from which we are gaining data, data which will be collated with the data from all of the play tests to get an overall view of how Westmarch feels about v8. One of the largest lands in Westmarch will have the smallest say.

For all those reasons I respectfully disagree with pretty much everything you wrote.

The thing I am MOST concerned with is that this attempt to remove someone from office (which has been withdrawn but you chosen to air all these accusations anyway), was done so late in the reign. Did any of those nine people on the petition really think removing someone from the last one-sixth or one-twelfth of their reign would actually have a net positive effect on the park? If you think Ka’a being bossy has driven more people from your park or has had a worse effect on the mood of the park, than your attempt to remove her, you are delusional.

I am particularly troubled because the people planning this petition for removal had to know that the bar was too high to actually achieve removal, because Ka’a still has too much support and it has to be a large majority against her. Since I deem most of you to be of reasonable intelligence, I have to assume you knew it would fail all along, even before you pulled the petition removal. Which means this wasn't about removing Ka’a for the good of the park. This was about making a statement. This was about being right. This whole ordeal made being right more important than doing what is good for the park.

The only possible message to future office holders in Thor’s Refuge is fall in line or this will happen to you. The irony of your repeated and unsubstantiated bullying allegations burns, they just burn.

I wrote more words in this response than I did planning all the battle games for Darkshore, by over a third. I am almost 1900 words into this response and I have yet to mention anything to do with foam, classes, magic or wrap shots. That fact makes me incredibly sad. I think everyone involved in this needs to pull themselves away from this issue and gain a little perspective on the situation. You don't have to like everyone in Amtgard, but you do have to cooperate with them. You don't have to want someone in office or appreciate their leadership style but the appropriate response is to organize for a candidate with whom you do agree to run for office, or even run for office yourself. None of this is the appropriate response to disagreeing with someone’s leadership style.
~Baronet Squire Etah Landshark
Corsair
Shire of Aegir's Hall

"Hate is a strong word, but I found out if you say it backwards what appears is a bald nerd." - MC Nameloc
User avatar
Etah
 
Posts: 999
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:25 pm
Location: In the Halls of Aegir

Re: Petition for Impeachment

Postby Ka'a Acklie » Sun Apr 13, 2014 11:50 pm

Through these last few months the park has had many difficulties and trials, and this has resulted in members petitioning for my impeachment. Though they have decided that they would like to withdraw the petition it will go to vote on May 4th.

I know many of you would like to see me try to defend myself against all of the accusations and go into detail regarding them, however, I do not believe that it would be productive or the right way to begin the healing process between the land members, the petitioning members, and myself. As I am only one part of the issues that have been sited and brought up during the petition and the talks I do not believe I can give a fully accurate or unbiased account of the circumstances surrounding this attempt to impeach me.

Through these last few months I have seen friendships destroyed, belted families divided, and households split regarding the issues that have been brought up. There has even been a conspiracy of how to make someone look bad at the mediated talks that involved knights, several members of the land, and members of neighboring lands, which I and a mediator feel defeated the true purpose of the talks. No one involved in the talks, this impeachment, or the events that led up to either are innocent or free of blame, including myself.

I did make some mistakes during my reign and have apologized for them. I came to this land to give it my best to help it where it needed help, and support the other members in office when I could. Yes my style of handling things might have come off as sometimes cold and unyielding, however I set hard lines and try to say what I mean in as few words as possible so that there can be minimal misinterpretation. If people inflect their own biases and opinions to what I say I do not feel I should be blamed for their misunderstandings. This issue was most recently brought up when Sir Euric had asked to discuss the impeachment and I declined any promise to answer his questions due to people twisting my words to fit what they want to hear/read, and because no evidence or details were presented with the petition for my impeachment I did not feel I could give accurate or well thought out answers to his questions. I’d like to actually thank Sir Euric for being the only one of the nine petitioners to come and ask for my side of things. None of the other petitioners had come to me asking to talk about the problems before or after the the petition was submitted. As three of the petitioners are minors, with parents that also signed the petition, I cannot fault them for not stepping forward to discuss the matters with me, however the other five had ample opportunities and time to approach me regarding the matters that were brought forward.

Since the announcement of the petition I have received an outpouring of support from members within the land, kingdom, and whole of Amtgard. Though I have had people try to compel me into giving up my position as monarch and positions on the BODs, I have not and will not back down due to the support I have received from the majority of the populous of Thor’s Refuge.

I would like to thank those that have supported me during my time as Duchess, and those that have stepped forward to name themselves as my friend and offered me assistance. I hope that since tensions have died down that everyone can all walk away from this event wiser and more understanding of one another. I would like to see friendships rebuilt, the land begin to grow again, and for each of us to remember when we point fingers that no one is innocent, not even ourselves.

-Squire Duchess Ka’a F Acklie
Fru Squire Ka'a F Acklie

Ego Sum Finis
User avatar
Ka'a Acklie
 
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:29 pm
Location: Atlantis, Atlantic Ocean

Previous

Return to Duchy of Thor's Refuge - Sacramento, CA

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron