Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Guild Council Meeting 20th Snow

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guild Council Meeting 20th Snow

    I wish to call a meeting of the Guild Council for the purpose of voting on new membership.

    Requesting Issues for discussion which can be raised by contacting Master Fips

    Revisit topics covered during previous meeting:
    Official Vote on How often Guilds can apply
    Official Vote on Increasing all crime punishments, including a minimum custodial sentence for murder
    Docktown Troubles

    Guilds with good reputation within the city are encouraged to submit an application to Master Fips

    All council representatives may cast a vote. This includes guild council members as well as representatives of the Great Houses, Constabulary, and Church. However, in the event that enough council votes are submitted (at least 3), the votes from the Great Houses, Constabulary, and Church will not be counted. So please everyone vote!

    The meeting will be held in the Guild Council room on Samedi, the twentieth day of Snow, 897 (ooc: Sat 20th Feb @ 10pm EST). If a representative is unable to attend, votes may be placed via scroll and address to me, Master Fips. These votes will remain confidential.

    Current active council representatives include:
    • Master Fips Rose - Gardening Guild
    • Dahlia - Taimyre Trades
    • Chance - Sailors Guil
    • Mersai - University of Triskellian
    • Sabachthani - The Hands of St. Trahern

    And again, the Great Houses, Church, and Constabulary may elect one representative to attend/vote in the event that more votes are needed to reach a decision.

    The Guild Council would also like to publicly acknowledge Trinity Taki de Bisclavret's resignation, and wish her all the best on her future endeavors.
    Master Fips Rose

  • #2
    *neatly shuffled to the fore*
    Master Fips Rose

    Comment


    • #3
      Outcome of the meeting

      Date: Lundi, the twentieth day of Snow in the year of 897 Apres le Miracle

      Attendance:
      Merchant Master Fips Rose, Gardening Guild of Triskellian
      Mersai - Triskellian University
      Nurse Sable - Doloreaux House
      Romain Lemieux– Avoirdupois House
      Royzo Zorro - Rinaldi House

      Apologies:
      None

      Issues
      Revisit Docktown Troubles
      It was agreed measures imposed during the previous meeting have returned the peace to Docktown, it was also noted that Miss Aiko has since severed ties with Lucky and Valdus and started a new guild under the name of ‘Femme Fatales’. Both the Avoirdupois and Doloreaux embassies had blacklisted this guild prior to the meeting, The Rinaldi House and Gardening Guild will likewise update their blacklist

      Virendra reappearance was then mentioned. Questions were raised as to the nature of his guild, and his most recent crime addressed, it was unanimously agreed to blacklist him and his guild.

      Vote on How often Guilds can apply to the Guild Council

      Unanimous agreement on a vote of 5-0 that any guild may apply once every six moons, with no cap on the number of applications

      Vote on serving a petition to the Don regarding increasing all crime punishments, including a minimum custodial sentence for murder
      Unanimous agreement on a vote of 5-0 was agreed to bring a to petition the Don for this matter, with particular note that Murder carry a minimum confinement of one week for first offense, two for second offense, ad nauseum, and to revisit the fines for all other crimes after seeking Constabulary input.
      Master Fips Rose

      Comment


      • #4
        Didn't even ask me to come represent myself? I am allowed no defense?

        I was under the impression all people in the Free City of Triskellian were allowed a fair trial - especially for a case that is essentially signing my death warrant.

        Comment


        • #5
          It appears that the Guild Council are forgetting proper procedures and how things are done. As one who has in the past attended many Guild Council meetings as a representative for the Rinaldi, I have the following to say.

          I have no fondness for miss Aiko or mister Virendra, but procedure certainly has not been followed in these cases.

          If there is to be a vote upon a topic, such as blacklisting a person, the precise vote needs to be announced prior to the meeting, in good time, so that all have a chance to speak up and those who cannot attend the meeting cast their votes through scroll.

          In this situation, it appears that the Houses are the ones behind the blacklistings, so it does puzzle me why it was even a topic discussed at the Guild Council.

          If a suggestion to blacklist the two individuals was proposed as a voting topic, it should have been made very clear prior to the meeting, and two votes be cast, one per person.

          Upon the increased crime punishments, while they might be commendable, no specific proposal was put forward prior to the meeting, and as such, again procedure was not followed.

          I do hope that those sitting on the Guild Council will reconsider how they conduct their business and remember that having a Guild Council is a privilege given by the Don to the Guilds of the city, to handle Guild matters.
          Liguria Trading
          specializes in the trade of rare and valuable goods of the highest quality;
          nationally and internationally.

          Comment


          • #6
            I could say what was already said or just spill a bunch of secrets out of anger but I'm not going to do either.

            I've tried speaking with the houses and guild council and they don't seem to care about trying to fix things or come to an agreement.

            That's fine, keep your items. I was fine without them and I'll continue to be fine.

            ::Aiko::

            [A little sassy cat has been drawn below the name.]

            Embinder Leader, Adjutant Preceptor of the Battlers, and Senior Page.
            Honored Guest & Junior Equerry to Lady Etaine

            Comment


            • #7
              At the time of the meeting, I felt something was wrong with it. But now, looking back and looking at the minutes, I know what was bugging me. The 'Guild Council Meeting' that was held was more a meeting of the houses then it was a meeting of guilds. All that was discussed was the houses' opinions and actions. A vote by any one of the two guild present would of mattered not at all, had any of the so called votes been actually called. Half of the votes that are being claimed to of been called, were rolled into one topic and were asked to be voted on about that one topic- not the individual ones.

              To sum up my words, and it hurts me to speak out against the Guild Council, but this latest meeting was a joke and at no way a proper or true meeting of the Guild Council. Just check the list of people present, only six people there and only two of them where actual Guild Representatives for the guilds active on the council. And it seems none of the others who failed to show actually seemed to of wrote in opinions or votes or given the chance to do so. And Vir should of had a right to of been there to defend himself and his guild.

              Comment


              • #8
                I welcome everyones input, and am more than happy to rectify things where procedures have not properly been followed. though I would argue that they have.

                The discussion of either person or their guild was not specifically intended, as the notes above will show it was on a wider issue, that of disturbances in Docktown. Their names were mentioned as a result, and discussions about their impacts on the city ensued. As was mentioned the issued was not one for the Guild Council, but was included in the minutes for full disclosure, and the majority had present already blacklisted the two individuals prior to the meetings.

                With regards to the laws, The Constabulary's opinion was of course sought, it was assumed that they were the authority on the laws.

                I have done a poor job hosting the Guild Council, I will therefore step aside and let some one else organise, and chair meetings.
                Master Fips Rose

                Comment


                • #9
                  I believe in my own opinion that everybody is focusing more on those who attended and miscommunication, rather then a few facts that people are not noticing or simply refuse to notice.

                  Master Fips had given two weeks warning in advance, followed by another warning five days before the meeting. The Guilds and Houses of the city were even encouraged to send a scroll to Master Fips with their thoughts on various matters and a vote on it.

                  However, when the meeting time arrived only five people came. Three of the houses, and two guilds. And the only one who made an effort to send a scroll of their opinion was the Constables. The meeting was even postponed by ten minutes to give the chance for others to arrive.

                  If Master Fips had denied the houses to vote or have an opinion, it merely would of been a meeting between Master Fips and Mister Mersai. If the Guilds of the City have been fairly warned in advance many times, even on the day itself through a page boy but fail to arrive or not bother to attend at all, in my personal opinion they should have no right to complain on how Master Fips conducted the meeting or those who put in the effort to attend the meeting.

                  And if I may also state in Master Fips defense, such matters were discussed prior to the meeting at the previous meeting held on Jeudi, the sixteenth day of Yule. You can read for yourself that theses matters were discussed prior and previously on the public board and records.

                  -Kapra
                  Kapra Zorro - Mouse Gentry for House Rinaldi.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Fips View Post
                    The discussion of either person or their guild was not specifically intended, as the notes above will show it was on a wider issue, that of disturbances in Docktown. Their names were mentioned as a result, and discussions about their impacts on the city ensued. As was mentioned the issued was not one for the Guild Council, but was included in the minutes for full disclosure, and the majority had present already blacklisted the two individuals prior to the meetings.
                    I believe that this is what is most upsetting to everyone and myself. Is the fact that we rolled the new issues of Vir, his guild and Aiko and her guild into this old issue which was focused purely on Lucky and Valdus and the trouble their guild was causing. Further, what has upset me, was that the only ones being discussed during this issue was what and how the houses handled it. That is their own things to do separate of the guild council.

                    Only input the guild council should have regarding such is how the guilds of the city handle these two, not the houses. The whole meeting, during this topic, was focused on the houses, not the guilds present, absent, or unrepresented on the council.

                    The council's job is to lay down laws and guide lines for the guilds of the city to follow and obey, not for the houses who follow their own.

                    Further, the blacklisting of Aiko, Virendra and their guilds sounds like a new topic to me and was brought up as one, to be talked and voted on at a later meeting as are the guidelines for the council. Fips himself said it during the meeting that Vir was new to be discussed after the issue. Yet here he is getting bundled up. This is wrong.

                    I feel it should also be noted that no vote on anything involving the Docktown issues was ever called previous to this meeting.

                    Originally posted by Fips View Post
                    With regards to the laws, The Constabulary's opinion was of course sought, it was assumed that they were the authority on the laws.
                    This was done right in my opinion.

                    I feel I should mention that the thing that upset me the most was the house representatives bringing talk of the houses and house actions into the Guild Council meeting. Which is supposed to be only about the guilds of the city. All I'm trying to do is strengthen the Council by pointing out the flaws in how it was conducted for the record so that they may be prevented in the future.
                    Last edited by Mersai; 02-22-2016, 02:39 AM. Reason: Misunderstandings

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      From the pen of Lord Mercutio,

                      I speak now to clarify the role of the Council, and the outcome of the recent meeting.

                      [OOC: An explanation of what the council's role, and the rules for membership and voting, is found in this thread - http://forum.skotos.net/showthread.php?t=97479 ]

                      Officially, the council does nothing more than makes recommendations to the Don.

                      This means the council does not give formal instructions about individuals or tell houses or individual guilds how to behave. Instead, they decide on broader laws and city policies.

                      The discussions that take place in the council chamber may well discuss individuals, and decisions about guilds blacklisting individuals may be taken - but that is still a discussion by individual guilds. It isn't a formal council decision.

                      To avoid confusion in the future, I will personally post the outcome of formal council votes after consultation with the Don.


                      The formal votes called in this meeting were:
                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      Official Vote on How often Guilds can apply
                      Official Vote on Increasing all crime punishments, including a minimum custodial sentence for murder
                      And the outcome was:

                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      Vote on How often Guilds can apply to the Guild Council
                      Unanimous agreement on a vote of 5-0 that any guild may apply once every six moons, with no cap on the number of applications
                      This is a social vote, and does not have legal standing. Any member of the council may ask for a vote to induct a new guild, at any time. Similarly, if no member of the council is willing to request a vote to induct a new guild, then no vote will be taken.

                      Rules about who can apply and how often they may apply are social in nature - intended so the council members can let the public know what they will accept in terms of applications. Should a particular guild be reviled, it is possible that no council member will request a vote to induct them. Should a particular guild have an ally on the council, it is possible that their ally might bring them up for another vote before the six month period has elapsed.

                      However, the council's intent is clear - they are making it clear that after holding a vote to induct a new guild which is rejected, they do not want to continue repeating that similar vote every meeting.

                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      Vote on serving a petition to the Don regarding increasing all crime punishments, including a minimum custodial sentence for murder
                      Unanimous agreement on a vote of 5-0 was agreed to bring a to petition the Don for this matter, with particular note that Murder carry a minimum confinement of one week for first offense, two for second offense, ad nauseum, and to revisit the fines for all other crimes after seeking Constabulary input.
                      Once the council has discussed with the constabulary, their recommendations for increased punishment will be delivered to the Don for approval.

                      Originally posted by Virendra View Post
                      Didn't even ask me to come represent myself? I am allowed no defense?

                      I was under the impression all people in the Free City of Triskellian were allowed a fair trial - especially for a case that is essentially signing my death warrant.
                      Fair trials are given to all citizens before a legal magistrate gives a legal punishment.

                      The council is free to discuss individuals, although it would be highly unusual to hold a formal vote about said individual. It is at the council's discretion whether to invite the individual to defend themselves - because there is no formal trial being held.

                      In the case of the blacklisting - whether to blacklist individuals is an independent decision made by each Great House or Guild. Although those houses discussed this topic at a council meeting, the council has no power to compel a House or Guild to blacklist any specific individual.

                      Master Fips was being helpful by reporting on the meeting minutes, so all may know what was discussed.

                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      As was mentioned the issued was not one for the Guild Council, but was included in the minutes for full disclosure
                      To avoid future confusion, individual guild members may post as they see fit to discuss or report on council meetings. I will post the formal outcome of any formal votes.
                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      I welcome everyones input, and am more than happy to rectify things where procedures have not properly been followed. though I would argue that they have.
                      Indeed, procedures have mostly been properly followed - however, it may be unclear what aspects of Master Fips' post were part of the formal proceedings, and what were reports of the minutes.

                      The discussions at council meetings may wander off-topic, and cover unexpected grounds. That is allowed, and why formal votes must be announced in advance.

                      It is common for the council to discuss a topic at one meeting, and during that discussion to decide whether to call for a formal vote at the next meeting.

                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      As was mentioned the issued was not one for the Guild Council, but was included in the minutes for full disclosure
                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      With regards to the laws, The Constabulary's opinion was of course sought, it was assumed that they were the authority on the laws.
                      As per the guild council rules: "If the vote is about the law, or enforcement of the law, the constabulary may also cast a vote. The constabulary may also call for a Guild Council meeting or vote, but ONLY about legal issues."


                      Originally posted by Mersai View Post
                      The council's job is to lay down laws and guide lines for the guilds of the city to follow and obey, not for the houses who follow their own.
                      The council may recommend new laws to the Don, or make recommendations about the administration or management of the city.

                      The Houses do still follow any laws that are passed, but may veto votes that clearly target themselves or their noble privilege.

                      As per the rules: "If the vote clearly targets one or more Great Houses, is about nobles or noble privilege, or is specifically about the servants of nobles, then any of the Great Houses may veto the vote. In that situation, the vote will not be conducted."

                      Originally posted by Mersai View Post
                      I feel it should also be noted that no vote on anything involving the Docktown issues was ever called previous to this meeting.
                      Indeed. And as such, as Chair, I can confirm that no formal vote regarding the Docktown issues has been made, nor passed to the Don.

                      Originally posted by Fips View Post
                      All council representatives may cast a vote. This includes guild council members as well as representatives of the Great Houses, Constabulary, and Church. However, in the event that enough council votes are submitted (at least 3), the votes from the Great Houses, Constabulary, and Church will not be counted.
                      Indeed, this is the only irregularity that I see. As per the rules for council votes:
                      A vote is only valid if there are at least four guilds present. This does not include guilds that sent a scroll with their vote. It DOES include the four houses, church & constabulary, even if those guilds are not voting.
                      (So if three houses have a representative, and one guild council member is there, the vote is still valid. Even though only one guild voted.)

                      As such, with the Houses present at this meeting, only the two guild members should have voted on the topic of how often new guilds can apply for council positions.

                      Similarly, only those two guilds and the constabulary should have voted on whether to increase the punishment for crimes.

                      Please see the attached document on the rules for how council meetings are coducted. [OOC: http://forum.skotos.net/showthread.php?t=97479 ]

                      Thank you,
                      Lord Mercutio,
                      Chair of the Guild Council

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I appreciate the clearing everything up! Perhaps now everything can be done right and smoother in the future.

                        I'm also aware that my postings might of been taken as negativity towards Fips, I did not mean to make it so only to point out something that had been nagging me at the meeting but was unable to pinpoint until reading the minutes.

                        I learned a little something new about the council; its role, and more- as well as got something cleared up about it. i hope the same can be said for others and for this, I thank you.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X