|
Post by Porcu on Jun 3, 2006 12:19:16 GMT -5
I'm sorry if you didn't mean for it to be flamebaiting, but the way that it was given to me and the way that I saw it lead me to conclude that it was flambaiting. You, and everyone else, need to know how to explain themselves correctly. Therefore, I am not removing that quote from the evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Gnidrah on Jun 3, 2006 12:49:36 GMT -5
Your honour, the chancellor is satisfied with the court's conclusion, in the matter of the charge presented by the chancellory. I thank the court for its time.
|
|
|
Post by Porcu on Jun 3, 2006 14:34:27 GMT -5
Any time...
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Christ on Jun 3, 2006 15:34:50 GMT -5
Forgive me, but this is a rather peculiar way to run a Court of Law.
|
|
|
Post by Porcu on Jun 3, 2006 16:24:36 GMT -5
How so?
|
|
|
Post by Robengrad on Jun 3, 2006 17:08:34 GMT -5
In the interests of fairness seeing as they are both as guilty as each other would it not be fair to give them equal sentences?? Seems a bit odd to me to punish one more than the other, but thats just my 2pence.
|
|
|
Post by Kritschboilek on Jun 3, 2006 17:09:35 GMT -5
I agree with JC, 'tis rather a peculiar way indeed, both EMC and AN have not really discussed or defended themselves, nor do I have had anything to do with this desicion, nonetheless I do being a judge also. Also AN has expressed to me how neglected and discriminated he feels in this topic.
I'm sorry, but I don't agree to this way of 'courting', and i politely ask for a revision and deep investigation on this topic which seems to be just an ordinary misunderstanding not worth any suspension of two cabinet members.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Christ on Jun 3, 2006 17:17:03 GMT -5
I agree wholeheartedly with the right and honorable Kirtschboilek!
|
|
|
Post by Kritschboilek on Jun 3, 2006 17:18:02 GMT -5
Consider yourself exalted!
|
|
|
Post by Porcu on Jun 3, 2006 18:39:28 GMT -5
Very well...I will handing over the case to you as you seem to know exactly what you are doing. I felt that because AN was accused of 3 different things and EMC only one that AN should get a heavier sentence.
|
|
|
Post by wrathfulpeople on Jun 3, 2006 18:46:58 GMT -5
I posted this in the complaints thread in the MoIA office and will post it here also, I am sorry but I have read what everyone has to say but I am still confused and do not understand what the major problem is. Our Chancellor has found this to be acceptable. I stand behind his decision along with the judge's. I mean no disrespect in this but basing that Atlantico Norte' is not guilty of flamebaiting because of one post which may or may not have had flamebaiting material in it does not over turn the other quotes that did show flaimbaiting. The way that I read it, EMC correct me if I am wrong, is that the previous quote Atlantico Norte' made, he got mad because she suggested that some one should either help him or replace him because of his work load and less than a week later, he posted that there would be a whole month where he would need the help for work reasons. That is just how I interpret that. If people read the other quotes, there really should be no discussion about the decision.
|
|
|
Post by tasmanyaya on Jun 3, 2006 18:50:29 GMT -5
Having acted as the original mediator, I would suggest to both you, Krits, and you, JC, that there is much that you are unaware of . Nor should you be aware of what transpires during a mediation session. Suffice to say, AN did not maintain his end of the agreement reached at mediation.
I do not know the normal procedure for the Court of Hyrule. I do know that the Minister of Internal Affairs has posted quotes available to anyone on the forum should they choose to look. It does, however, seem that this is not the forum in which to be having this discussion. I assume appeals can be made to the Chief Justice.
As for this being a simple misunderstanding, again, one would have had to have been involved in the mediation to know that this is definitely not the case. Should the case come to appeal, I will be more than happy to provide details of what led to the mediation.
As for sentencing, EMC was charged with flamebaiting only. AN was not. Nor has EMC ever had a complaint filed against her in the past. AN has. That was what the original mediation was all about.
|
|
|
Post by Kritschboilek on Jun 3, 2006 18:51:14 GMT -5
Nono, that's not what I meant, you don't have to put it only on me - i can't bear that , we all have to work together and make some kind of 'round-table'. If you allow AN and EMC to say their words and defence, and what they really meant... That is a better option than just ban them - you're just postponing the issue then...
|
|
|
Post by Porcu on Jun 3, 2006 20:03:54 GMT -5
Sorry for that! Ok, then the ban is lifted until we can resolve this, right?
|
|
|
Post by Nisomia on Jun 3, 2006 22:54:57 GMT -5
I understand what you are trying to say, Tas, but looking at the quote that AN posted on the previous page of this topic, I see no flamebaiting by AN. Now, I know there are more quotes, which I will look at later, but that's my 2 cents at this current moment, 1:54 PM EAST (Eastern Australian Standard Time).
Also, I would like to know whether this involves my board. I pray it doesn't, as I would not want to condemn 2 of my close friends.
|
|