News:

Welcome to Wittenberg!

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Açafat del Val

#151
Wittenberg / Re: Weak
September 23, 2020, 03:11:09 PM
Spoken by utter childishness.

A person seeking such a powerful position as Uppermost Cort judge should not, and should never, behave as AD has done. I voted in committee to advance his nomination, because I believed at that time that a second chance was earned, much like another nominee had earned months prior. That second chance was slowly, surely, and definitively eroded by his own actions over the months after that committee report was made.

It is total folly to conflate the Government's collective decision with personality politics. What is truly arrogant and astonishing is not the Government's withdrawal of its support, but the guffawing and offense about that withdrawal.

Let me lay this down clearly: Unless you're Brett Kavanaugh, you don't get to be considered for a judicial appointment and then insult, berate, humiliate, or attack good-working and well-meaning colleagues. That's not how the world works, or should ever work. AD's response to the Government's decision was exactly the sort of behavior which caused the Government to change its mind: a man who wants the office, deserves the office, and would serve the office well does not retort to ad hominem rhetoric, least of all when there is an opportunity for a mea culpa.

No one has to be perfect; they just have to treat people with respect and want to improve themself.

If you don't get that, then it must be because you've never had to provide for a family-- or, for that matter, hold a position of actual leadership.
#152
Quote from: Ian Plätschisch on September 23, 2020, 01:09:38 PM
Quote from: Açafat del Val on September 23, 2020, 12:46:29 PM
Another opportunity for humility has been wasted. Where an olive branch or some constructive sentences would have sufficed, you chose antagonistic and agitative rhetoric.

That rhetoric has no place in a court of law.
What did you expect? That he would grovel before you to win back your favor, which would clearly be futile anyway?

If the coalition no longer finds the nominee to be suitable, then there is not much I can do. All I have to say is that you cannot throw out barbs and then be shocked and appalled when you get stung back.

Speaking for myself, and not on behalf of the Government or the province of Florencia: I have always expected that a judicial nominee should comport themself in a manner befitting the office. A professional adult should not look like this when rejected for a job:

#153
Another opportunity for humility has been wasted. Where an olive branch or some constructive sentences would have sufficed, you chose antagonistic and agitative rhetoric.

That rhetoric has no place in a court of law.
#154
Many months ago this year, when the Government of Talossa signaled its interest to fill a vacancy on the Uppermost Cort and support the nomination thereto of S:reu Alexandreu Davinescu, it was the opinion at the time that the gentleman was capable, befitting, and deserving of the office.

During the intervening time, however, the Government has been witness to a discomforting number of displays of inappropriate, unbecoming, and unprofessional behavior of the nominee. To name only a few: Several articles on the Talossa Wiki were vandalized, where good-faith efforts would have sufficed. Impugnation, defamation by implication, baiting, and gaslighting have become pervasive tactics used among colleagues and fellow citizens. Where good intentions may have been attributed, or an opportunity presented for constructive feedback, instead malice or incompetence were assumed and destructive words deployed.

Following the formation of the contemporary Cabinet, new members of the Government have expressed that they opposed nomination from its beginning. Moreover, the aforesaid displays have caused substantial belief among other members that the nominee, if appointed to the office, would fail to serve honorably, prudently, or purposefully.

Indeed, some of the behavior witnessed has persuaded the Government as a whole that the nominee may fall prone to lesser instincts and, worse, may have never wanted the office in the first place, except to the extent of ego and pride rather than duty or service. While no crime was ever committed, it is true, too, that no judge of Talossa should act or speak as has been seen.

Therefore, as the incumbent Attorney-General and a member of the Government, I do regret to inform the public of our decision to withdraw all and any support for the nomination aforementioned: and, if it should continue through the legislative process of the Ziu, then it will continue without the endorsements of the Government, the Free Democrats of Talossa, or the New Peculiar Way.

/s/
Açafat del Val
23 Sep 2020/XLI
#155
Florencia / Re: Nimlet Session (Sep 2020-Ongoing)
September 22, 2020, 11:35:13 AM
Fair enough. I'm still of the opinion that these rewards ought to be allowed to be granted on any day with enough notice, even if it'd be better to do so on the actual Florencia Day. But perhaps I can introduce my own resolution amending the law, what having the two wee seats here that I have ;)

In any case, I vote PER on Resolution 2020-03.
#156
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on September 22, 2020, 12:43:52 AM
(This is the kind of stuff the Legislative Janitor will be in charge of finding one day!)

Or the Túischac'h can have something to do for once, besides pomp and circumstance! ;)

And the Mençei!
#157
Florencia / Re: Nimlet Session (Sep 2020-Ongoing)
September 22, 2020, 08:36:33 AM
I'd like to vote PER; my only concern is that the order be granted "as a part of Florencia Day". Could this not be granted on any regular day, or at least any general day of significance? Seems odd to restrict this to one day of 365.
#158
El Viestül/The Lobby / Re: CABINET for the 55th Cosă
September 22, 2020, 08:34:32 AM
It is my honor to be invited again to serve as the Attorney-General.

I have an open door to all Talossans. If ever you need legal help, advice, or inquiries, do not hesitate to reach out.
#159
El Senäts/The Senate / Re: Do we have a Mencei?
September 21, 2020, 03:05:46 PM
I am embarrassed to admit that I have failed to figure out how to "tag" people on this platform, despite my efforts to discover it.

It was certainly not a move born of bad faith. Can someone send me a PM maybe, showing me how?
#160
Wittenberg / Re: On Anarchism
September 21, 2020, 03:03:46 PM
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on September 21, 2020, 02:41:23 PM
I am a communist, but I'm not going to nationalise Açafat's toothbrush.

I, for one, am a little offended by this. My toothbrush is very valuable, and thus, the fact that you would NOT want to nationalize it means you think it's of little value.

Grrrrrr.

On a serious note: I speak only for myself when I say— I would welcome an ideological or principled anarchist gladly, but not someone whose long-term goal is to tear down the OrgLaw and remove law altogether (or, worse, someone who lies to cover up these intentions).

I also appreciate humor, lightheartedness, and even the individual's quick response time.

What I don't appreciate is a concerted effort to avoid a simple answer. It doesn't break the mood or undermine the spirit to say, "I like Talossa as it is, although I may fight against excessive bureaucracy or a bloated legal code".

If the gentlemen cannot say something to that effect, then we should give pause and consider whether he can swear the oath of citizenship in good faith.
#161
Then I am wrong :)
#162
Wittenberg / Re: No political arguments = Happier Talossa?
September 21, 2020, 11:21:41 AM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith

I'll dance with you all night, if you'd like. Just know that I sorta have two left feet.
#163
This is so great!

Could we get an HD version and put it up on the website?
#164
Wittenberg / Re: RIP Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
September 21, 2020, 10:25:03 AM
Well, "dominant" to the extent that it leads domestic policies and forms the law. That's pretty powerful, even if there are checks and balances. The Federalist Papers make it pretty clear the that Founders foresaw an eminently powerful and productive Congress, and this was the case until Teddy Roosevelt turned the game upside-down.

My point is that I'd much prefer a quiet president who leads foreign policy and leaves laws to Congress (the presidency has become a psuedo-kingship, which is disastrous; we should never expect so much from a single office), a Supreme Court that is so far less politicized, and a Congress that has at least 650 Representatives in the House.
#165
I would like now to plug shamelessly a bill that I wrote during the last term:

https://wittenberg.talossa.com/index.php?topic=231.0

I could get behind reintroducing this bill and adding a statutory duty to the presiding officers so that they form an ADVISORY committee. Far better than a committee of arbitrarily appointed people who get to pass or fail someone's idea. Gatekeeping is not cool.