[TERPELAZIUN] Seneschal - (2023/03/14)

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Estimat Túischac'h,
if I may, the Seneschal is under the wrong impression that changing words in a question doesn't change the question itself, which is not true.

I decided to conclude the Terp not because - as he said - I was "frustrated" by him but because meanwhile the Ministreu dal Finançù announced something that openly contradicted the Seneschal's previous statement so I felt that situation in a way was satisfying to me and I didn't want to be forced to conclude that the Seneschal was refusing to answer. I did that mostly out of a concern for him.

Than the Seneschal made - maybe out of his frustration - a comment - that could be considered unparliamentary, but I'm willing to overlook it - and in that comment he also said "his effort to get the answer he WANTED would continue to frustrate him no matter how many times he reworded the same question". I raised a Point of Order to have the Seneschal reminded that all that the Membreux WANT is an answer to their Terpelaziuns: it doesn't matter how he perceives a question, as long as that question is lawful and the "operative" part of the question is different ("do you think" and "why you think not" are different) he has to reply, even briefly, and not to decide which answer is worth of reply and which is not.

As I raised a point of order, I know sit and cease to engage on this.

I thank the MC again for ceasing this expired line of inquiry and repeat that no is an answer.

[Üc R. Tärfă]

Estimat Túischac'h,

I'm happy to provide the Seneschal some definitions of why in different dictionaries, I am sure he will find them very enlightening and useful.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4

Méirci.

[Breneir Tzaracomprada]

Estimat Túischac'h,

I'm happy to provide the Seneschal some definitions of why in different dictionaries, I am sure he will find them very enlightening and useful.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4

Méirci.

I appreciate the offer.