Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 07:19:54 PMAs I just said: we would be prepared to consider this as evidence of an attempt at good character, and you would no longer be considered ineligible for public appointments or positions of trust.

Currently, because you have sexually harassed another citizen, you are not considered to be eligible for such positions -- if that's what you mean by "boycott."

In April 2025 you opened the Summit on Toxicity and Destructiveness with a joint statement from Avant and the Progressive Alliance. It stated the following:

Quote2) we pledge non-cooperation with and informal boycotts of serial harassers whose behaviour does not (yet) rise to the level of criminal activity; to end when such offenders convincingly change their ways.

I am referring to your words when I mention a boycott, Baron. I am not asking for an informal statement. I am asking for a joint statement from the parties who have continued this boycott. Using your statement as the standard, the new statement should confirm that I have convincingly changed my ways and demonstrated good character.

As I just said: we would be prepared to consider this as evidence of an attempt at good character, and you would no longer be considered ineligible for public appointments or positions of trust.

Currently, because you have sexually harassed another citizen, you are not considered to be eligible for such positions -- if that's what you mean by "boycott."

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on Yesterday at 05:47:49 PM

Quote from: xpb on Yesterday at 05:08:25 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on Yesterday at 04:24:43 PM

Quote from: xpb on Yesterday at 04:12:12 PMI have always voted in public and I encourage others to do so as well.

Why is that?

Both the first and the second halves of that sentence.

The discrimination in the proposed measure is towards the right of those who state their preference in public at any time that votes are being accepted.  The current system preserves the right for a private vote, but does not force temporal restrictions on freedom of speech for those who wish to state their preferences in public.  Party lists are likely to vote in a similar manner but certainly have no requirement to do so, and to imply that stating a public vote is to diminish free will is inappropriate.

You didn't answer the question.

The first part is less important, since "because I feel like it" is an acceptable answer.

I'm much more interested in why you think it is preferable for other people to vote publicly.

Ok my answer is that I would encourage people to exercise their freedom of speech to say how they have voted, and if desired, why they voted as they did.

My question for you is why you would seek to restrict free speech?

Assuming that we can work to end the boycott I will soon be out of the Ziu. This effort will get more of my attention.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 06:41:42 PMYour insistence on making a bargain where you agree to do these things and then get something in exchange is gross. However, as already indicated, we would be prepared to consider this as evidence of an attempt at good character, and you would no longer be considered ineligible for public appointments or positions of trust.

Guys, I'm not looking for a promise of government participation, or endorsement of character, or revived friendships. I think if I continue to be who I am and over time this is compared to how I have been treated then the case will make itself. I am looking for you to just take the above information and confirm the end of the official boycott in an official statement signed by you both.

I have said repeatedly now that that is all I need.

You're right, your harassment campaign was a long time ago. It took a year of public pressure before you finally agreed to make a real apology, taking responsibility. Unfortunately, the fact that it took a year of encouragement before the bare minimum of apologizing tended to undercut it. However, you are also right that it is not reasonable to just have this status quo go on forever.

In response to that, we presented you with two things you could do that would demonstrate that you were actually sorry and trying to change: resign from the legislature for one term, and then take a course we selected on how to avoid avoid harassing others and the importance of consent.

You should do these things, not because we are demanding them, but because they would show that you actually are sorry and weren't just forced to it. They would show that you are actually interested in learning.

Your insistence on making a bargain where you agree to do these things and then get something in exchange is gross. However, as already indicated, we would be prepared to consider this as evidence of an attempt at good character, and you would no longer be considered ineligible for public appointments or positions of trust.

However, your behavior has also otherwise been pretty unpleasant. And so we cannot possibly promise that other folks are going to want to associate with you. We have no power to make you likable. Only you have that power.

We shouldn't delay any further. I call for a vote on the election for Premier.

I vote for myself.

Folks, have we nailed down the time for the State Opening? I'm working on the Opposition (extremely small as it is) speech but would like to know more on when we are meeting.

Ah, I see October 25 at 1-2 Pacific Time. Is that confirmed?

The Praisideu is pleased to announce that the honorable Capitán of Fiova for the current Cosa term is @Bråneu Excelsio, UrN .

As provincial Túischac'h (chair of the General Assembly of all Fiovans) I urge him to start a public discussion on how to restore Fiovan glory over the next eight months.

Response:

Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on Yesterday at 06:01:37 PMI have been asked repeatedly to change my behavior. The behavior in question, I thought, was saying things to Luc that could make him uncomfortable. I've not done this since well before the Summit, many months ago. So the behavior has not just changed it is nonexistent. Which makes me wonder what behavior you are talking about.

I was asked to make an apology. I made an apology, which was viewed as insufficient. Ok. I made another apology, much simpler which acknowledged responsibility without qualification. That was nearly three months ago. There was no response to it beyond a like from Miestra which was followed by mentioning other things that had nothing to do with harassment.

I have done what you asked.
Repeatedly.
Now you are asking me to take a course and resign from the Ziu.
Again, I am prepared to accept but need proof that this will be the final request with concrete assurances on what is being agreed to so that I, and other tired Talossans, know we are moving on.