Discussion Administrative Tribunal Commentary Thread

COOL IT Stop. Take silly 'Let's Make SV a Country' talk to Chat Lounge. This is the Tribunal Discussion Thread.

 

8 pages of tribunal deliberations? Well above the norm.

Here we go, though!

Edit: Huh, I actually recognise this one, a while back I saw this guy posting on a full-bore rant over this case on ... elsewhere.

 

Jesus Christ this was a long one.

Also, excuse me. *starts drinking*

 

I wasn't very involved in the Tribunal, but I have heard every single Councilor who frequents IRC go mad.

Some say they were mad to begin with.

 

Oh yeah, just want to say this, BeaconHill's advocacy was flat-out masterful here.

 

Still on the first page, but getting the overwhelming sense that at some point in their lives John Smith was mugged by a 15 year old girl.

 

Man, MJ12 hurled himself into a brick wall with the procedural objections. But to be fair, everyone else was right, it was an utterly absurd point to dispute, and in any case it isn't the duty of the Council to make the staff's rules more comfortable for the staff, especially not mid-stream in a tribunal hearing.

Edit:
Couple pages in, and there's a few interesting elements in this case. Particularly in the contentions that while no particular point of the Quest thread violates Rule 2 of the CC, that it presents as a whole a flagrant violation. A 'strands of a cable' circumstantial case in the Australian terminology, which I don't think we've really had before.

Edit 2:

Mrph, worth saying that you can have three years and thousands of explicit words about the greatness of das Reich without being problematic depending on how you handle the subtext to undermine the unreliable narrator. Granted, not every quest writer can pull stunts like Nabakov, but even so.

Edit 3:
A few businesses near my work recently had a bunch of tree lopping done. Compared to what Beacon is doing to these arguments she is feeding into her rebuttals, those branches that went into the woodchipper actually held together pretty well.

Edit 4:
Can only imagine John Smith's ego was taking a tremendous pummeling from the impromptu literary reviews he was getting in this thread.

Edit 5:
Quite the firebrand is shadenight.

Edit 6:

*slow whistles*

Edit 7:
Ramenth on Page 6 had by far the most convincing of the uphold arguments, really well done.

Edit 8:
After reading Vorpal's comments, and cf'ing with a few similar comments...

Should we be at all concerned that half the Councilors were by their own admissions conducting their investigations and deliberations while under the influence of alcohol?

Edit 9:

Poor, poor Ralson...