[TNC STATEMENT] Thank you, Talossa!

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

This horse is good and beat. Let's move on folks. This entire conversation is derailing the purpose of the thread.

[Viteu]

This horse is good and beat. Let's move on folks. This entire conversation is derailing the purpose of the thread.

Talossans responding to a party thanking Talossans is derailment. Ooooookkkkkaaaayyyyy.

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

This horse is good and beat. Let's move on folks. This entire conversation is derailing the purpose of the thread.

Talossans responding to a party thanking Talossans is derailment. Ooooookkkkkaaaayyyyy.

A different thread would be a better place. Thanks.

[Viteu]

I find it baffling that someone who takes judge neutrality so seriously is willing to completely throw away their principles on a (ironically politically motivated?) whim.

I find it baffling that the TNC thinks that an apolitical Judiciary is nonsensical.

I find it baffling that you and the TNC think that the TNC is entitled to a different set of rules than everyone else.

I find it baffling that you're okay with having a politicized UC bench.

But that's cool. Keep thinking you're not the problem.

[Viteu]

This horse is good and beat. Let's move on folks. This entire conversation is derailing the purpose of the thread.

Talossans responding to a party thanking Talossans is derailment. Ooooookkkkkaaaayyyyy.

A different thread would be a better place. Thanks.

Why?

[Viteu]

@Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN , what say you?

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

A different thread would be a better place. Thanks.

Why?

Wittiquette Rule # 9 - Don't de-rail or take a thread off the original topic by posting another topic or changing the subject.

This conversation about judicial philosophy and judges holding seats in the Ziu is not the original topic of the conversation. I'm politely asking you to move on or start a new thread. I'd be happy to move the conversation for you if you wish.

[Viteu]

A different thread would be a better place. Thanks.

Why?

Wittiquette Rule # 9 - Don't de-rail or take a thread off the original topic by posting another topic or changing the subject.

This conversation about judicial philosophy and judges holding seats in the Ziu is not the original topic of the conversation. I'm politely asking you to move on or start a new thread. I'd be happy to move the conversation for you if you wish.

I don't agree. What is the recourse? Do I sue and hope it comes before me on the UC?

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

You don't have to agree with a polite suggestion to move on. You've not directly violated Wittiquette as you've not been rude or abusive. I'm simply suggesting this conversation threatens to derail the topic. If you want to be angry, fine. Be angry. I've already been called a pompous bureaucrat today, so why not. Pile it on.

[Sir Txec dal Nordselvă, UrB]

You don't have to agree with a polite suggestion to move on. You've not directly violated Wittiquette as you've not been rude or abusive. I'm simply suggesting this conversation threatens to derail the topic. If you want to be angry, fine. Be angry. I've already been called a pompous bureaucrat today, so why not. Pile it on.

I should point out that my suggestion was not directed at you Viteu. I was talking to everyone posting in the thread on the topic.

[Viteu]

You don't have to agree with a polite suggestion to move on. You've not directly violated Wittiquette as you've not been rude or abusive. I'm simply suggesting this conversation threatens to derail the topic. If you want to be angry, fine. Be angry. I've already been called a pompous bureaucrat today, so why not. Pile it on.

I should point out that my suggestion was not directed at you Viteu. I was talking to everyone posting in the thread on the topic.

Okay. Because I really question how calling attention to the TNC for its apparent about-face with respect to an apolitical Judiciary where the TNC is thanking voters for their support, which includes, presumably, this position, violates Wittiquette.

[Viteu]

Like, I don't think it's the role of the State to protect a political party in this circumstance.

But now we are derailing the thread so I'll cease commenting on Wittiquette. 

[Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN]

@Dame Litz Cjantscheir, UrN , what say you?

PJ Marcianüs does raise some valid points which I agree with and other points I don't. 

I do believe this is an issue that we, the Justices of the CpI, need to have an open and honest discussion on and collectively decide what is the best approach for Justices of the CpI and in the best interests of Talossa. I have replied to PJ Marcianüs' email in our chambers to start this discussion and hopefully, we all can reach a consensus on what is expected of CpI Justices going forward. 
 
Therefore, until such a time that the CpI comes to an agreement that it is ok for Justices to hold seats in the Cosa and to be "politically active", I will immediately cease all political activity and will not be accepting any Cosa seats for any party and ask that the SoS reassign any seats allotted to me according to the TNC party's wishes. 

[Viteu]

Thank you. I look forward to having this conversation among UC Judges.  In the interim, I will follow the SJ's example and cease all politicking.

[Iason Taiwos]

Code Select Expand

Come on, Txec. This wasn't a personal attack. You're a good dude, and we Cjoavni admire you. I guess my statement was a mispoken, clumsy attempt at expressing my frustration that my best friend, who is very much involved in Talossan life...but offline...had his citizenship removed. It wasn't against you, but the system. I apologize if you felt I was insulting you. Man, I feel bad.