I've created this specific thread to avoid misplacing unapropriate remarks
QuoteAt times it gets difficult to call sexual harassment from compliments. The main difference between the two is motivation. When one compliments someone, their primary motivation is to make a person feel good, valued and appreciated. Compliments are typically given when trying to establish a relationship and build trust.
Harassment, on the other hand, is a primary motivation of power, intimidation, and violation of a person's boundaries. It can make a person feel uncomfortable, or as the definition of sexual harassment says, it can make a person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.
https://www.sentrient.com.au/blog/the-difference-between-a-compliment-and-sexual-harassment
Yeah, it's a good topic to discuss -- I'm not exactly sure what to do, since he's not using offensive language specifically. Breneir's engaged in what might be called covert sexual harassment: https://www.fishertaubenfeld.com/blog/2024/02/what-is-covert-sexual-harassment/ "Persistent, unwanted flirting" is gross, but hard to pin down.
Well, it doesn't need to be offensive language, does it? It just has to violate Wittiquette Rule 8:
QuoteDon't be a troll or otherwise post in a way that is intended solely to annoy people or infuriate them.
We just need to enforce that IMHO. And Witt moderators can be the judge of that, they don't need the poster to say "ha ha yes, I'm just doing this to bug him"
Yeah, fair enough. I don't think it's really ambiguous what he's doing. In situations like this, I always worry about creating a bad precedent, but it would be intolerable to just look the other way because it was inconvenient. I would certainly support action, since he already had a warning.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 06:20:00 PMYeah, fair enough. I don't think it's really ambiguous what he's doing. In situations like this, I always worry about creating a bad precedent, but it would be intolerable to just look the other way because it was inconvenient. I would certainly support action, since he already had a warning.
I agree with this. I was unambiguous. If you believe I am wrong then you are obligated to act now. Please be clear in defining the wrong-doing for the purposes of future precedent. I am happy to accept any lawful sanction deemed appropriate for what is deemed unlawful and inappropriate behavior.
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on February 10, 2025, 07:39:00 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 06:20:00 PMYeah, fair enough. I don't think it's really ambiguous what he's doing. In situations like this, I always worry about creating a bad precedent, but it would be intolerable to just look the other way because it was inconvenient. I would certainly support action, since he already had a warning.
I agree with this. I was unambiguous. If you believe I am wrong then you are obligated to act now. Please be clear in defining the wrong-doing for the purposes of future precedent. I am happy to accept any lawful sanction deemed appropriate for what is deemed unlawful and inappropriate behavior.
Well, it's persistent, unwanted flirting, as I said. And Title J is the legal authorization for the enforcement of Wittenberg. There's nothing "unlawful," since persistent and unwanted flirting isn't a crime, but rather a clear violation of the legally-described "minimum level of acceptable behavior."
The sanction must extend exclusively to Wittenberg, by my reading, and could not (since you're a legislator) include suspension or banning from the "necessary infrastructure to allow the Ziu to fulfill its functions, including proposing, debating, and considering bills and the posing of Terpelaziuns." So until the Cosa is dissolved, you probably couldn't be legally barred from the Government boards, since that'd probably be inorganic.
Hypothetically, the Secretary of State could ban you from every other board, though. And when the Cosa is dissolved, you could just be banned from Wittenberg. That seems like it would be overkill for a first penalty. I'd suggest a short suspension, personally, but this is at the discretion of the Chancery.
Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 07:54:42 PMThe sanction must extend exclusively to Wittenberg, by my reading, and could not (since you're a legislator) include suspension or banning from the "necessary infrastructure to allow the Ziu to fulfill its functions, including proposing, debating, and considering bills and the posing of Terpelaziuns." So until the Cosa is dissolved, you probably couldn't be legally barred from the Government boards, since that'd probably be inorganic.
I would actually go further. I don't think he can be banned from any boards which are necessary to exercise his rights as a citizen, without those rights being officially curtailed by a Cort judgement - because that would be giving Witt moderators effective power of banishment. So even once the Cosa is dissolved, I don't think he could be banned from the Corts boards, or probably the Immigration forum. (Florencia province board would be up to the discretion of its local moderators IMHO - as would the Corts boards, come to think of it.) But the main Wittenberg, the Chat Room, other boards which are not necessary to access to exercise his rights under Organic and Statute Law - definitely yes.
Thank you both. As I stated I am prepared to accept any sanction deemed appropriate for what are considered to be offenses.
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on February 10, 2025, 08:31:33 PMQuote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on February 10, 2025, 07:54:42 PMThe sanction must extend exclusively to Wittenberg, by my reading, and could not (since you're a legislator) include suspension or banning from the "necessary infrastructure to allow the Ziu to fulfill its functions, including proposing, debating, and considering bills and the posing of Terpelaziuns." So until the Cosa is dissolved, you probably couldn't be legally barred from the Government boards, since that'd probably be inorganic.
I would actually go further. I don't think he can be banned from any boards which are necessary to exercise his rights as a citizen, without those rights being officially curtailed by a Cort judgement - because that would be giving Witt moderators effective power of banishment. So even once the Cosa is dissolved, I don't think he could be banned from the Corts boards, or probably the Immigration forum. (Florencia province board would be up to the discretion of its local moderators IMHO - as would the Corts boards, come to think of it.) But the main Wittenberg, the Chat Room, other boards which are not necessary to access to exercise his rights under Organic and Statute Law - definitely yes.
There's precedent for people being banned from the Corts board as well, and they were able to send in their petitions via email. The Cort ordered them unbanned from Witt for the proceedings alone, and they were directed to post nowhere else on Witt under penalty of sanctions for contempt.
Yup, right, but that would require a Cort order rather than the Chancery's say-so.