Opinion - "The Forgotten Story"Written by Writinglegend
On the Office of the Supreme Chancellors
On November of this past year, Supreme Chancellor Mousebumples posted an op-ed titled “Why I Resigned” detailing several points regarding why I, as then President, played a role in her resignation. These allegations included playing a game of revenge and having weak interpersonal skills, among other things. It should be noted that at this time Mousebumples was a Supreme Chancellor with Lethen, and people were already privately telling me she was fuming due to my repeal of the Spam Accords -- an international agreement she forged. When the recent discussion of the Office of the Supreme Chancellory (OSC) came about in the Senate legislation Removal of the Supreme Chancellory (2017), my mind immediately went to this story. One thing I have noticed is how this piece Mousebumples wrote, and the actions she took to garner such information, have become silenced and forgotten in the Europeian political void.
From "Why I Resigned" said:Similarly, he appears to have taken a similar approach with his Ministers. There is minimal content being posted to Tomlinson, and while I can't legally disclose what has been posted there, I saw nothing in the posted content with regards to the Spam Accords or other WA Ministry related content after Malashaan lapsed into inactivity. However, if discussions were continuing to occur on off-site forums, failing to copy that information over to the forum for continuity purposes for the next administration
In this hit piece posted by Supreme Chancellor Mousebumples, which was also edited by Lethen, the tradition of admins and the SC's releasing information from forums that don't apply to them despite their ability was broken. The author went into Tomlinson and released information that hadn't been revealed publicly, which is a clear breaking of the tradition that has been followed for years. It is particularly concerning when such a tradition is reiterated as," I didn't view that as "not applying to me" because I view my role as Supreme Chancellor as trying to help all aspects of the region function as best as possible."
Helping all aspects of the region function does not mean going into a private area and releasing what hasn't been stated. Rather than “helping the region function as best as possible”, the Supreme Chancellor in question went into Tomlinson to reinforce a hit piece against someone she politically disagreed with. If you don't see the issue with that, then ethicality is nonexistent. I never received any form of an apology, and these actions were never addressed as "wrong," “unethical,” or, "breaking tradition". Inaction is a very strong action. It is a reinforcement of the behavior that caused the issue. I am not specifically targeting Mousebumples. I also find Lethen to be partially at fault as an individual who read over and edited the piece prior to publication, although he may have simply missed the details. This means both Supreme Chancellors saw absolutely nothing wrong with the action provided. Both were tolerant of going into Tomlinson and releasing details there using universal viewing privilege powers to reinforce a hit piece against someone they politically disagreed with (again, more benefit of the doubt to Lethen as he simply edited and could have missed it).
I do not have a personal vendetta against Lethen and Mouse. I can sit down and chat with them about stuff and we can have fun for shits and giggles. I don't care about this argument, really, but just simply wish to point out this observation we have seemingly forgot. I’ve seen many statements from people who note they have no clue of any “power abuse” or “political misconduct” from the Supreme Chancellors, thus I felt the need to detail this experience in writing. As Mouse was not an Administrator at the time, she was purely using universal viewing privilege powers granted to her as a Supreme Chancellor to garner such Tomlinson information.
After this event occurred I took a multi-day Leave of Absence because I stopped feeling the game. I felt pushed away. I felt isolated. More importantly, I felt targeted. I didn’t think an individual(s) would use their special powers granted to them out of respect and honor to write a hit piece targeting a political enemy. It felt worse because this was a Supreme Chancellor, and whether I like them or not they’re individuals I feel we can all aspire to be. The worst part about this was not that Mouse went inside of Tomlinson and dared to release what she viewed as a lack of information to support her op-ed, but was the fact that the other Supreme Chancellor in our region collaborated as an editor. No matter who you are, if you have both Supreme Chancellor’s collaborating on a hit piece against you, you will feel attacked by the most prestigious members of our Republic. It was an absolute low point for me.
In my opinion, this forgotten story is where the book of distrust towards the OSC began. Whether rightful or not is another topic for debate, but many individuals looked at the rummaging through Tomlinson and external release as a political usage of power from the OSC. These issues were stressed in recent months, when what many viewed as the Supreme Chancellory “Clique” founded the Coalition for Responsible Politics. Currently, the party holds one Supreme Chancellor who chairs the political party and one Vice Chancellor who is a member. To me, this signals that the populace wishes for a more apolitical Chancellory. Rach, current Minister of the World Assembly, notes this as well when stating, “I'd like to point out that my current preferred solution would be an apolitical Chancellery.” Perhaps, with the widespread view of cliques within our region, citizens want a more insular Chancellory who doesn’t smell of a single group of friends. Or perhaps, individuals simply want to abolish the Chancellory entirely.
Those in-tap with the political climate recently know that this amendment was a long-term frustration that boiled over. By all means, the OSC had multiple attempts to learn from its transgressions and change its potential behavior. Even recently, I’ve heard of the OSC becoming highly involved within Senate matters by lobbying questions to Senators during NES’ confirmation hearing. It’s clear behavior will not change unless there is a rude awakening. That is where this legislation and discussion come into place.
I talked about this with HEM recently, but a completely unbiased, apolitical individual is impossible in a government simulation game that relies on politics. You cannot expect someone to not hold political opinions. What is different in this case is whether it distorts their service in such a role. With a look at our forgotten story, we can see it has distorted service to create a lowered confidence of the office. I don’t have my mind made up on what I feel should be done with the Office, but I happen to not care. What I care for is that those in the Supreme Chancellory recognize how their actions have affected the community and see the very clear, vivid message citizens are sending: we aren’t satisfied. But that message is only conveyed if we release our voices to the public rather than private discord channels. If you have a problem with the actions of the Chancellory or its members, don’t sit silent. Then they won’t realize that it’s wrong. If you have a problem with how we view the Chancellory and the office itself, don’t sit silent. Then we won’t realize we need to change.
With this issue, there is one certainty. A disconnect between the OSC and the citizenry on how political and insular its membership should be is very real. I hope this legislation -- whether I agree with it or not -- will allow for such a region wide discussion to take place in order to bridge such a gap. The answer is, as it usually is, region-wide discourse.