Senate Confirmation Hearing: Sestak for Deputy GM (Confirmed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You know the irony is that LT's comment about Labor came as off as inappropriate to me, but DFW's latest post essentially amounts to "LAbor will keep him from going off the rails, so he can serve as an effective Deputy GM".

We have a history of trusting partisan figures as being GM or Deputy GM, that doesn't concern me. What concerns me is that we have a partisan organization holding its organizational stability up as the primary means by which an individuals' competence will be maintained and a sudden departure avoided. As someone who has seen instability in both parties crop up out of nowhere, it seems rather dubious.

I for one most certainly am in favor of Sestak working out his differences with Lumine, regardless of what happens here in this confirmation hearing, but there are other unrelated and direct pressing questions that need to be answered as well. I can understand if he prefers to answer them all at once, after having completed an interaction with Lumine, but until those answers are given and given from him instead of DFW or anyone else I don't feel comfortable voting in favor.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

You know the irony is that LT's comment about Labor came as off as inappropriate to me, but DFW's latest post essentially amounts to "LAbor will keep him from going off the rails, so he can serve as an effective Deputy GM".

We have a history of trusting partisan figures as being GM or Deputy GM, that doesn't concern me. What concerns me is that we have a partisan organization holding its organizational stability up as the primary means by which an individuals' competence will be maintained and a sudden departure avoided. As someone who has seen instability in both parties crop up out of nowhere, it seems rather dubious.

I for one most certainly am in favor of Sestak working out his differences with Lumine, regardless of what happens here in this confirmation hearing, but there are other unrelated and direct pressing questions that need to be answered as well. I can understand if he prefers to answer them all at once, after having completed an interaction with Lumine, but until those answers are given and given from him instead of DFW or anyone else I don't feel comfortable voting in favor.

What I meant was that we wont let him get too involved in labor leadership and such which is what overwhelmed him and caused him to quit last time This will ensure he doesn't get overwhelmed and will be able to serve the position without worrying about who is gotving for us.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

You know the irony is that LT's comment about Labor came as off as inappropriate to me, but DFW's latest post essentially amounts to "LAbor will keep him from going off the rails, so he can serve as an effective Deputy GM".

We have a history of trusting partisan figures as being GM or Deputy GM, that doesn't concern me. What concerns me is that we have a partisan organization holding its organizational stability up as the primary means by which an individuals' competence will be maintained and a sudden departure avoided. As someone who has seen instability in both parties crop up out of nowhere, it seems rather dubious.

I for one most certainly am in favor of Sestak working out his differences with Lumine, regardless of what happens here in this confirmation hearing, but there are other unrelated and direct pressing questions that need to be answered as well. I can understand if he prefers to answer them all at once, after having completed an interaction with Lumine, but until those answers are given and given from him instead of DFW or anyone else I don't feel comfortable voting in favor.

What I meant was that we wont let him get too involved in labor leadership and such which is what overwhelmed him and caused him to quit last time This will ensure he doesn't get overwhelmed and will be able to serve the position without worrying about who is gotving for us.

The fact that you are treating this as a matter of Labor's responsibility as a party to control Sestak's behavior is concerning.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

You know the irony is that LT's comment about Labor came as off as inappropriate to me, but DFW's latest post essentially amounts to "LAbor will keep him from going off the rails, so he can serve as an effective Deputy GM".

We have a history of trusting partisan figures as being GM or Deputy GM, that doesn't concern me. What concerns me is that we have a partisan organization holding its organizational stability up as the primary means by which an individuals' competence will be maintained and a sudden departure avoided. As someone who has seen instability in both parties crop up out of nowhere, it seems rather dubious.

I for one most certainly am in favor of Sestak working out his differences with Lumine, regardless of what happens here in this confirmation hearing, but there are other unrelated and direct pressing questions that need to be answered as well. I can understand if he prefers to answer them all at once, after having completed an interaction with Lumine, but until those answers are given and given from him instead of DFW or anyone else I don't feel comfortable voting in favor.

What I meant was that we wont let him get too involved in labor leadership and such which is what overwhelmed him and caused him to quit last time This will ensure he doesn't get overwhelmed and will be able to serve the position without worrying about who is gotving for us.

The fact that you are treating this as a matter of Labor's responsibility as a party to control Sestak's behavior is concerning.

Labor makes sure that nobody has to bear too much of the brunt and works as a cohesive unit, something you wouldn't understand!

[Lumine]

I spoke with the nominee during the weekend and we discussed both the current situation and the future, as well as some misunderstandings that may have arised thanks to how DFW chose to frame the matter – for that matter I must second Yankee and LT, his comments are downright unhelpful -, and then I gave this some serious thought as to what I should say or whether I should indeed reconsider my earlier comments on my office thread.

To go straight into the matter I maintain my recommendation that the Senate does not confirm the nominee.

I’d like to clarify this is not because of anger or out of a campaign of personal revenge. Bitter as experiencing that situation on election night was, after the conversation and after reflecting on my own frustrations I can certainly believe he did snap due to the unholy pressure of the game and thus did something distasteful that he normally would not do, and I can also agree with some of his colleagues when they argue that the nominee is a skilled player with great potential. And I certainly want to believe him in the sense that this will never happen again.

And yet it seems to me it’s just too soon and too early. Too early to judge how well the nominee can handle the pressure – and I’m sorry if this sounds disrespectful – of being part of the Game Engine and taking more and more responsibilities (assurances that a given party will keep him under control are not only silly, they’re actually demeaning to the nominee, the Game Engine and these hearings) without this situation or something similar taking place again, and of course, too soon considering just two months ago we were in a very serious and very dark situation, and one in which he did leave the game precisely because he had too many responsibilities.

Just as I wouldn’t want any player to snap due to the pressure I very much wouldn’t want anyone else to go through the experience I had to go through either, and it seems to me that time (a longer period of time) will serve as a better and more responsible judge than the Senate confirming in the blind.

[Sestak]

Ok, I’m going to be responding to all these questions/concerns tonight. But first I would like to say that on my nomination and the issue of my fitness for the position, I will accept whatever judgment the Senate comes to with no hard feelings.

[Sestak]

Not a Senator, but just wanted to state that as someone who previously served as Deputy GM, I understand the backlog of stories needed to put out, and how hard that can be to get done when real life takes priority. I do have some concern with the fact that the two most recent additions (Scott and Sestak) are both registered in Fremont, and both intend to be in office in Fremont. So I fail to see how this really helps with ensuring equally represented stories can be posted when the two new additions focusing on stories won't be able to post Fremont stories due to conflicts of interest.

I think Mr. R's response addressed this quite well. It's not as if stories are currently only lacking from Fremont - stories at all levels just aren't there right now, which is the primary reason I'm being nominated for this. I intend to be able to write several stories a week.

[Sestak]

Not a senator, but I have two questions to which the answers I believe would add meaningful content to this process.

When you left the game last, you left it during a time when people were quite frankly counting on you. It was two weeks before the last presidential election. The ticket that you were the leader of had been formally nominated by the Labor Convention, and was favored to win according to the overwhelming majority of the polls. You also served as the PPT of the Senate. However, one day, without warning, you announced your departure from the game, saying it was negatively affecting your grades and serving as a drain on your life. Put simply, you made a big commitment to the game - but ultimately failed to have a life that allowed you to keep that commitment.

I am not objecting to your return in and of itself, but I do note that you are quickly seeking to take up a large role in the game once again. Not only are you seeking office in the Fremont Parliament once a seat opens up, but you are also seeking this office - part of the game engine, the very entity which makes this game possible. Collectively, these two positions make up a significant amount of time that you will be expected to commit to the game. Given the short amount of time that has passed since your departure and the fact that you cited your large role in the game in the past as part of the reason you were forced to leave it, What assurances and evidence can you offer to the Senate that your life now allows you to take a large role in Atlasia without neglecting the essential elements of your life - not just for the summer when you may have more time on your hands - but for the long haul - and that you will not find yourself leaving the game again?

For what its worth, you are correct in assuming that I have more time through summer than I will after that point. So it actually is quite likely that I will be toning down my involvement at that point - probably just to one role. It could be Deputy GM, it could be something else, depending on the need. I would also note that five months is actually a pretty long tenure for a Deputy GM relative to past holders of the position.

The direct answer to your question is that I'm going to make sure I'm not taking on too large a role that it would cause me to neglect parts of my real life. This includes not taking on roles that are constantly demanding - as Deputy GM, my primary responsibility would be to write a few stories each week, which is something I can frontload for periods of time if it becomes necessary. This offers a stark contrast to running for President, administering the Senate, or chairing a party, each of which requires daily or near-daily attention on its own.

Also, I personally find it rather amusing that you demand I assure the Senate that I won't leave the game again. People leave the game. Sometimes they come back, sometimes they don't. Even among the most well-respected Atlasian figures, only a few of them have gone without leaving the game even once. Many times, people have to leave the game because personal reasons make it the genuine best choice for them, and I personally would be rather alarmed at the precedent set, not just with myself but for future confirmations, if the Senate demanded I make an assurance that I will never leave the game again as a prerequisite for confirmation - thus I will make no such assurance. Only that I currently plan to serve in this role for at least the next several months and will do all I can to help the Game Engine run more smoothly during that time.

[Sestak]

Second, about two weeks after you left the game, you made a brief re-appearance in which you accused the then-Vice-President-Elect of manipulation of the electorate. Following mass criticism, you recanted, stating (as I understood it) that you had witnessed the occurrence of a glitch. I'm not here to re-litigate the specifics of what you did or did not see. But, given that you will be in a position of some authority should you be confirmed, What assurances can you give that you will not make spurious accusations with little or no evidence while you serve in this office?

Now this is a somewhat trickier issue - but it's one I have thought about before I reregistered. What happened last time was a combination of a series of lapses in judgement combined with pent-up frustration, all of which were causes of my being emotionally too invested in the game.

So I am trying to come at this from a lighter perspective this time - this is a game first and foremost, after all. I think this kind of attitude, if I can keep it up, will go a long way towards preventing unpleasantness like what I caused three months back.

I will keep it real, however. No system is foolproof, and I've already lapsed once before. What I do think I have now, however, is a more clear understanding of what the warning signs are that I may reenter into that kind of behavior. And I will say this: if I do start noticing those types of signs again, I will immideately start making preparations for my departure from the game. I don't expect it to reach this point - again, I think the way I'm approaching the game this time around (as a fun thing on the side, not an RL obligation) should prevent that from happening. But this is something that I'd like the Senate to be aware of - if I begin to feel my judgment slipping, I believe it would be best for everyone involved if I began to withdraw from the game. Granted, I wouldn't do it without making sure there was a clear, quick succession plan in place. And I'd continue with fulfilling all my ingame responsibilities until it happens.

[Sestak]

Honestly, my biggest worry would not be that Sestak is not qualified for the job; but the fact that it may affect his own mental health and RL situation. We must never forget that this is a game and RL comes first.

He seems to be rising fast again. Of course if he can cope with that, it's great, but he should be careful. However, that's a call for him to make of course.

Others have made some vague statements on this, but the responsibilities I'm taking on are still far less than what I had before - not administering a chamber, not running a party, not running for President, etc. Equally as important is that these commitments are much more flexible - they don't all require daily attention (I can miss Parliament for a day or two if I really need to, and the position for which the Senate is considering me is one in which I can, as mentioned earlier, frontload my work and do it ahead of time if I'm busy at certain points. They're also positions where I can take LOAs if necessary without major ramifications.

And, as I also mentioned earlier, I'm definitely trying to take it lighter this time. I'm hoping I can keep that up.

[Sestak]

Honestly, my biggest worry would not be that Sestak is not qualified for the job; but the fact that it may affect his own mental health and RL situation. We must never forget that this is a game and RL comes first.

He seems to be rising fast again. Of course if he can cope with that, it's great, but he should be careful. However, that's a call for him to make of course.

The confirmation process exists for a reason. The Senate should seek all the information it needs and desires from the nominee about why Atlasia now works in his life when two months ago his life forced him to abandon all ties with Atlasia. It should only confirm the nominee if it believes the nominee can be active for the long haul. For while RL takes priority, there is a difference between RL taking priority and RL taking over. The game does need an active GM team, and IF the nominee's outside life prevents him or seriously threatens to prevent him from executing the duties of this position, the Senate should reject.

The reason I felt I couldn't fit Atlasia into my life at that point was that I had taken on many responsibilities that:

1. I couldn't really get out of without having things crashing down
2. Required pretty much constant attention, so I was using all the time I could.

The seeming finality of my commitments sort of got me trapped in a spiral and made things only become worse for me, which is why my cutoff was so sudden in the end - I was afraid anything more gradual wouldn't stick and would end up making my situation worse.

Again, as I mentioned before, being an active member of the GM team doesn't mean the same thing as being active in my previous roles. Being an active member of the team just means I should have certain stories ready on schedule and help out with numbers stuff when I can. It's a much more flexible set of tasks than anything I was doing prior to my departure.

[Adam Griffin]

What is this, 2013? This brings back memories!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, I personally find it rather amusing that you demand I assure the Senate that I won't leave the game again. People leave the game. Sometimes they come back, sometimes they don't. Even among the most well-respected Atlasian figures, only a few of them have gone without leaving the game even once. Many times, people have to leave the game because personal reasons make it the genuine best choice for them, and I personally would be rather alarmed at the precedent set, not just with myself but for future confirmations, if the Senate demanded I make an assurance that I will never leave the game again as a prerequisite for confirmation - thus I will make no such assurance. Only that I currently plan to serve in this role for at least the next several months and will do all I can to help the Game Engine run more smoothly during that time.

Is it unreasonable to vet nominees though? It would be more unreasonable to my opinion if the question was not asked and then something happened, then if the question was asked and nothing happened. It comes down to a matter of responsibility on our part to least get a general feel for how much and how long a commitment a given officeholder can make to a particular office especially ones that are not elected and in the case of GM department less easily dismissed if the need should arise.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Basically, this nominee has high name rec for all the wrong reasons. And it doesn't really subscribe to the usual nomination mantra for this administration, which has mostly consisted of a mix of well-respected Leftists who have stuck around for lots of time (YE, Razze, etc.) , and milquetoast Centrists (Brugh, Ninja, etc.).

Not sure if I am misreading this, but the administration did not make this appointment. GMs are not part of the administration.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is this, 2013? This brings back memories!

I backed you in 2013 as I recall and that wasn't centered around concerns over departure/being pushed to the limit, it was over whether or not you would be impartial as Game Moderator.

[YE]

To correct the record on the inaccuracies:
-“this administration” implies that the appointment was made by the president when it was made by the GM
-Reactionary, Scott, Encke have all had absences from the game within the past year
-Sestak had high name recognition long before his departure from the game. He revived Labor after all.
-You note myself and Razze as leftist who have been around a long time. Sestak joined the game at around the same time as Razze and I.

Then again considering you slandered both of us when running for VP in the Labor primary by sending a highly inaccurate PM about Sestak’s activity level and making sh**t up about me becoming VP, this should not surprise me.

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

The point that I am most interested in seeing Sestak address himself is the idea that his party will be responsible for "managing his behavior."

[Adam Griffin]

At the risk of being perceived as THE PARTY, my advice to Sestak is very simple: give the Senators a few more posts to actually show their true intentions - and if they are still dead-set on being concern trolls (I'm looking at you, LT), give up and let bygones be bygones. If this position is actually needed (how many deputies are actually needed, anyway? This job was once handled by one person, after all), then they'll inevitably need to fill it with somebody who cares about doing the job.

3/1/13 - Confirmation Hearing: Adam Griffin for GM (REJECTED)
3/11/13 - Confirmation Hearing: Adam Griffin for GM 2.0 (CONFIRMED)
3/05/14 - Confirmation Hearing: Adam Griffin for GM (CONFIRMED)

[Adam Griffin]

What is this, 2013? This brings back memories!

I backed you in 2013 as I recall and that wasn't centered around concerns over departure/being pushed to the limit, it was over whether or not you would be impartial as Game Moderator.

I know! And I went through not just one, not two, but three confirmation hearings as GM (ultimately serving two tenures; in the end, I of course became disillusioned with the job - in large part because very few actually pay attention to its merits). I served more or less a year in the job and dispelled with all of the fictions that were cast at me during my first confirmation hearing.

This is 2013 all over again, with the same concern-trolls using different masks and partisan labels. If I could inherit Sestak's body, I would frankly withdraw his nomination and let LT or whomever pick one of his Discord buddies and see if they could do better (they couldn't).

[Sestak]

The point that I am most interested in seeing Sestak address himself is the idea that his party will be responsible for "managing his behavior."

From subsequent conversations I've had with DFW, it seems his claim was only something along the lines of "Labor will make sure he doesn't become chair or a presidential nominee, which are what caused him to be overworked in the first place". Neither of these are things I planned on doing anyway, so I don't really see this as changing much. I find the idea that my party would actually be policing my actions and involvement absurd, quite frankly, but I don't think that's what was meant here.

In any case, I don't need a party or formal organizations to 'police' me, not do I want it. I can monitor my involvement level perfectly well myself.

[Sestak]

Is there anything else?

Anything I missed?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The WNN Neither endorses nor opposes the nomination

[fhtagn]

I still stand by my main concern that there is a massive conflict of interest having multiple Fremont officeholders as Deputy GM, and would rather someone else be put forward from another region to help.

While Mr. R might be able to try to write Fremont stories, I understand how busy he is IRL and from being in the GM dept as Deputy GM, I know these things are easier said than done.

And in the event he is too busy to write Fremont stories, half the GM dept cannot pick up the slack because they are officeholders in that region.

Obviously I cannot vote since I am not a Senator, but I hope that the Senate can at least consider this issue, and that Sestak can understand this isn't personal, nor is it partisan.

[tmthforu94]

I was alarmed and hurt by Sestak's actions in February towards myself and Lumine; it was a very low blow and disappointing considering Lumine and I had stayed positive throughout the campaign. I have made mistakes during my time in Atlasia and have also taken things too far a couple times. While opponents of mine have been unforgiving of my past transgressions and I feel it could give me the excuse to do the same now, I'm going to do the opposite - I forgive Sestak for what happened in February and have moved on. What hasn't been discussed too much in this hearing is whether Sestak is capable of producing high-quality stories and how those stories can impact the game. Based on his record and history, I think he would do a good job at that.

My concern with the nomination, though, is tied in to what Fhtagn stated. We already have a 3-person GM team, whereas in the past this position only has 1 person, 2 max. Additionally, we already have a person who is devoted solely to writing to stories for the GM team, and the conflict of interest Scott has is identical to what Sestak will have, which creates another barrier. I don't think we should just keep throwing bodies at the problem with the hope that it sticks.

An alternate scenario, as opposed to recommending that the Senate just vote down this nomination - I think that between Scott and Sestak, one should focus solely on serving Fremont, while the other focuses solely on being a Deputy GM and writing stories, rather than both trying to give 50/50. I have a feeling Fremont activities will come as the first priority as that is an elected position, and this will take a backseat again. I hope Mr. Reactionary considers this and has a discussion with both of them. This would result in either Scott's resignation as Deputy GM + Sestak's confirmation, or Scott not running for FM and Sestak's nomination being withdrawn/voted down. That being said, I am not a voting member, nor do I have appointment power, so this will be up to the Senate and Mr. Reactionary to decide, along with Scott and Sestak.

[YE]

What did Sestak do to tmth in February?