W1ze Vote-Off (And UPDATE Regarding the Situation)

I agree. I do not believe it is easy to make an informed decision knowing just the information on this thread. I would prefer to hear both sides. I do not believe that I can fairly vote on this vote-off unless this takes place (and so, I will not be voting).

This is not a poll of whether you agree with how these "call out" threads operate, this is a thread asking whether you think wize has done his job as the server liaison. You can't vote no because of something that has nothing to do with wize.

What would you call a proper procedure? We have put down evidence regarding wize which has proofed he has been lying to us. We have taken a poll regarding his roll as the server liaison and have asked him to give his side of the story. Why do you not find this fair?

I'm not making this vote off because Wize didn't do anything (although I suspect this may be the case, however, I have no hard evidence of this and thus won't be citing that as a reason). I am doing it because of the dishonesty (lying). Wize made claims about things that Seth has directly said did not happen, meaning he lied directly to me and the rest of the community. And although I can't justify his actions, I'd really like it if he responded. I approached him multiple times about what he did, and was blown off each time. If he had been upfront and didn't make up stuff about money, we wouldn't be here now. Executives are supposed to be the most trusted people on the server and to have one lying is not acceptable IMO.

A proper procedure would be what Zaid already noted earlier: a formal thread wherein a discussion can be hold in regards to an acting executive's performance over the past few months. Here, the executive in question has ample opportunity to explain themselves, before an actual vote is put forth. 
I think it is nonsensical to already put a vote-off on the forums, when W1ze has had no time to actually explain the situation, so of course it looks shady as fuck. I am more than willing to give W1ze the benefit of the doubt in the thread that was (and should have been made if we are following the actual exec policy). It is completely unfair to W1ze (and to me as well) that these threads were made on a whim instead of actually giving the accused a platform to explain their situation. You could literally just have PM'd our EAO on the matter, and that would've most likely been handled far more professionally. 

Eh, the EAO literally just said that the current exec policy was to be amended with that suggestion, so that is some-what shaky logic you're going by. You cannot dispute the fact that making a spontanous thread calling somebody out with a poll attached that can kick them off from their position without giving them any proper chance to explain themselves beforehand is disingenious.
That is still not to say I support / disapprove of W1ze as Server Liason.

Myself and others have tagged Wize multiple times asking him to give his side of the story and he is yet to answer. Infact, he is yet to even post on this thread. We have discussed his situation here and Darth has given proof of him lying. Now then, you can go ahead and give him the benafit of the doubt but that is somewhat unfair as he seems to be ignoring this thread's existent. We cant force him to give his side of the story and it is unfair to blame the voting process becuase he wont give information. If anything, he knows he is guilty and is just keeping his mouth shut hoping this will fall through the cracks and be forgotten.

You have tagged him in THIS thread multiple times. The thread that has called him out for abuse and for a lack of transparency with a neato poll attached to it which is most likely going to lead to him getting booted off from the position. A big portion of the votes cast already are basically set in stone, even if the voters were to change their mind, because a big chunk of those voters will most likely not even view this thread again. So therefore I still strongly object to the very premise of this thread, and still am very much in favour of an actual discussion beforehand.