Taijitu
Government of Taijitu => The Ecclesia => Legislative and Treaty Votes => Topic started by: Cormac on March 09, 2015, 07:32:10 PM
-
A motion has been introduced and seconded to adopt the following amendment to the University of the Revolution Act:
Clause 2e of the University of the Revolution Act will be amended as follows:
2e. The Aniane Lecture Hall shall be dedicated to lecture and question-and-answer sessions, and shall be dedicated to the memory of Aniane, a short-lived but much-beloved Taijituan.
2e. The Limitless Events Lecture Hall shall be dedicated to lecture and question-and-answer sessions, and shall be dedicated to the memory of Limitless Events, a much-beloved Taijituan.
Citizens may vote for or against the amendment or abstain from voting. Voting will last for five days. The original discussion can be found here (http://forum.taijitu.org/proposals-and-discussions/taijitu-university-lecture-hall/).
-
imwetodupavo
-
This amendment has passed with 7 votes Aye, 6 Nay, and 6 Abstain.
-
Traitor babies!!
*shakes fist*
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
As discussed on IRC, 7 votes is a majority when one discounts abstentions, which is what the Citizen-Initiator has always done.
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
As discussed on IRC, 7 votes is a majority when one discounts abstentions, which is what the Citizen-Initiator has always done.
As much as I feel you Delfos, Cormac is correct.
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
As discussed on IRC, 7 votes is a majority when one discounts abstentions, which is what the Citizen-Initiator has always done.
This from the guy who screamed bloody murder when we didn't include an Abstain option. XD
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
As discussed on IRC, 7 votes is a majority when one discounts abstentions, which is what the Citizen-Initiator has always done.
This from the guy who screamed bloody murder when we didn't include an Abstain option. XD
So if you want to eliminate the Abstain option, why didn't you brought it up during the debate? hm? What a flawed approach Allama, keep hammering the same key.
Anyway, I did suggest a better approach to this topic, did anyone care, ever? The result of this vote is clearly craptastic, mostly because I disliked the change in the first place, but it's evident only 7 out of 19 actually wanted it.
-
are you kidding? with 7 (36.8%) it passes? wtf?
outrageous, traitor babies a la laterne!
As discussed on IRC, 7 votes is a majority when one discounts abstentions, which is what the Citizen-Initiator has always done.
This from the guy who screamed bloody murder when we didn't include an Abstain option. XD
So if you want to eliminate the Abstain option, why didn't you brought it up during the debate? hm? What a flawed approach Allama, keep hammering the same key.
Never said I wanted to eliminate Abstain. Nice try, Trollfos! ;)
-
np Trollama, neither did I, Abstain is a self-winning case, it has been present in most votes, and this one probably has a record count. There really is no problem with the Abstain vote.
What there is is the chosen approach for this vote, I wish to correct it asap.
-
np Trollama, neither did I
A. Don't steal my crappy jokes. I need them to pretend to be funny.
B. No one said you did. What are you even responding to?
What there is is the chosen approach for this vote, I wish to correct it asap.
What is the precise problem with the "chosen approach" and what exact approach would you favor instead? Not sure I understand what you mean here.
-
what a terrible idea. I'd much rather a Solnath, a Bara, a Xyrael, an Allama Lecture Hall.
[21:36] <@Delfos> I think people want to change the name of the Lecture Hall
[21:36] <@Delfos> just not to Limi
allong with more discussion on the issue, which apparently Allama wouldn't be a bad option.
-
What there is is the chosen approach for this vote, I wish to correct it asap.
What is the precise problem with the "chosen approach" and what exact approach would you favor instead? Not sure I understand what you mean here.
what a terrible idea. I'd much rather a Solnath, a Bara, a Xyrael, an Allama Lecture Hall.
[21:36] <@Delfos> I think people want to change the name of the Lecture Hall
[21:36] <@Delfos> just not to Limi
allong with more discussion on the issue, which apparently Allama wouldn't be a bad option.
While I appreciate the name drop... what does this have to do with the poll approach you dislike?
-
options, either study which was better or vote them all. Which I intend to do asap.
-
What exactly about the current "approach" do you feel is wrong? I'm not getting that from your replies.
-
What exactly about the current "approach" do you feel is wrong? I'm not getting that from your replies.
It's not the "current "approach"", it's this approach to this vote. Despite debate on the contrary, the only option to vote was defended by 1 and seconded by another, it doesn't seem to me to be the best approach regarding said "debate on the contrary" which I already explained and I don't know why you ignore what it means when I say I'd like to have had the other options to vote. Would it make sense we would actually explore which options are best and, only after, vote on them? It does to me.
-
What exactly about the current "approach" do you feel is wrong? I'm not getting that from your replies.
It's not the "current "approach"", it's this approach to this vote. Despite debate on the contrary, the only option to vote was defended by 1 and seconded by another, it doesn't seem to me to be the best approach regarding said "debate on the contrary" which I already explained and I don't know why you ignore what it means when I say I'd like to have had the other options to vote. Would it make sense we would actually explore which options are best and, only after, vote on them? It does to me.
I'm not ignoring what it means: what you're saying makes no sense to me and I want clarification, specifics, so I can understand.
What other options do you want? We debated and the amendment went to a vote. What specifically was wrong with this process? What are you looking for?
-
Would it make sense we would actually explore which options are best and, only after, vote on them? It does to me.
(http://www.pd4pic.com/images/cartoon-shopping-cart-grocery-animal-shelves.png)
-
That's nice, dear.
-
I employ sexism when I don't know what to say. *
* Edited for accuracy
-
that is very insulting, a coward way to go on against what I believe.
-
First the "marriage counseling" comment, then the fucking rude frivolous lady picture, now this?
You are the insulting coward, Delfos. I may have allowed my anger to get ahold of me more today than usual, but at least I have the decency not to pretend I didn't do something after I clearly did.
Don't even try to act like you'd have behaved the same way towards a man.
-
wtf are you talking about
1st the marriage counseling has everything to do with exaggerating something I did or didn't do, it would have happened the same either you were a man or a woman, maybe you're the one being sexist.
the "lady picture" was actually a drawing of a supermarket shelf and someone going shopping, as illustrative to EXPLORING OPTIONS...looking at many brands and having actual choice.
somehow you interpret completely wrong, which isn't surprising, I've come to expect prejudice from you.
-
wtf are you talking about
1st the marriage counseling has everything to do with exaggerating something I did or didn't do, it would have happened the same either you were a man or a woman, maybe you're the one being sexist.
the "lady picture" was actually a drawing of a supermarket shelf and someone going shopping, as illustrative to EXPLORING OPTIONS...looking at many brands and having actual choice.
somehow you interpret completely wrong, which isn't surprising, I've come to expect prejudice from you.
Quick, backpedal harder!!!
-
imwetodupavo
As someone who abstained in this vote, I think it may be appropriate for me to clarify what I intended with my vote.
I intended to abstain from affecting its result. I decided that I would rather not weigh in on this decision, and preferred the matter to be settled by people who did want to weigh in.
-
Very insulting. You don't know me Allama, clearly, not many people do, but I can't accept you coming here insulting me this way. You should just accept the fact you don't understand what I say instead of clinging to your misinterpretations.
-
When I don't understand what you say, I openly admit it and ask for clarification (not that I'm likely to get any).
In this case, you posted sexist things and now are trying to pretend you didn't by shifting focus to me "insulting" you. Not buyin' it.
-
I would never, it's your prejudice talking, just like those other times I've told you.
you're just stubborn to interpret the worse in me, if it has a different definition than prejudice then go ahead and call it whatever you want, I don't know any other definition.
-
Even if you were not consciously behaving in a sexist fashion (which seems likely), sexism clearly colored your aforementioned two responses to me. It is perfectly possible to treat people differently based on gender without realizing it.
Whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not, you disregarded my questions and instead posted rude things... that you would not have if I were a man. Claim the opposite all you want. Based on the arguments from today and on many comments you've made in IRC in the past, I can no longer believe that you lack sexist attitudes.
-
Even if you were not consciously behaving in a sexist fashion (which seems likely), sexism clearly colored your aforementioned two responses to me. It is perfectly possible to treat people differently based on gender without realizing it.
Whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not, you disregarded my questions and instead posted rude things... that you would not have if I were a man. Claim the opposite all you want. Based on the arguments from today and on many comments you've made in IRC in the past, I can no longer believe that you lack sexist attitudes.
Well, you keep hammering that same key. I think you're the one not conscious of your prejudice.
Maybe the confusion was that I announced a drawing could be required in another topic, I'm sorry that you missed that reference and instead got enraged by misinterpreting the drawing I posted.
Maybe a drawing is required.
Same thing with the "marriage counseling", I say the same thing to my male friends when they exaggerate someone's behavior negatively, what possibly could it have about sexism besides your own intake on the matter?
Here I was discussing we should have more options to vote for, yet I'm the one that doesn't make proposals and is apparently sexist just because you want me to be. No, neither one of my comments were sexist, I actually campaign in RL for feminism, against domestic violence, against gender roles, against chauvinism (I even called a friend chauvinist yesterday haha), recently I've positively changed an all 5 male member jury on a contest to a 3 male 2 female jury, I wouldn't consider anybody could ever insult me being sexist.
Again, this thread as any other are perfect places for discussion, trying to devalue any input isn't what I think it should be done, for either this issue or the others being discussed.
-
I am pretty sure you both have viewed each others posts with a cloud of hostility and would ask you both take a break from this discussion to get your perspectives aligned with their true lens.
-
true lens:
upon talking about new girls in our community I told in Taijitu chat while talking almost directly to Allama:
[22:15] <@Delfos> we should be like Portugal and gently ask all companies listed in stock exchange to have at least a third of women...or else we'll make an imperative quota
[22:15] <@Delfos> and do that for our government
How can you gather the complete opposite from that?
and if anything was sexist about that "drawing" was Google for only showing women shopping when searched:
"supermarket shelf shopping cart drawing" < I would definitely post a drawing of supermarket shelf and a gorilla shopping, alas none have came up from my quick search. If I knew you'd be pissed off about this I'd probably post this:
(http://www.pd4pic.com/images/cartoon-shopping-cart-grocery-animal-shelves.png)
-
I stopped posting.
I let it go.
I figured it wasn't worth continuing to argue and be upset.
But you just can't leave it alone, even after having the last word. So fine, here we go again.
These threads are perfect places for discussion, indeed. My issue is not with you discussing things: it's the vehemence with which you regularly oppose others' ideas without proposing any legislation yourself. You have never done this, despite your protestations. No community enjoys seeing someone tear down others' work without bothering to be constructive as well. It's a toxic attitude. If you aren't good at legal writing, that's fine, simply post precisely what you want the law to do and someone else can help with the legalese.
And once again, you are using the word "prejudice" where it does not apply. Check the dictionary definition. It's not only me saying I'm not prejudiced in this situation; you are the only one making that claim.
You can say you're not sexist until you're blue in the face. Posts made today visibly and openly counter those statements. It is possible to both work for equality consciously and to carry unconscious bias, to treat someone poorly because of their gender without intending to. Your comments to me have been demeaning. Nothing you do IRL is relevant to that. Saying or doing a nice thing does not cancel out saying or doing a shitty thing.
You can also attempt to color me as some enraged woman finding offense in unoffensive things if you wish to continue doing so. It is not believable. Admittedly I was quite furious during parts of this "discussion" but I found your behavior offensive well before I hit that point emotionally.
In fact, the picture you posted was so obviously not germane to the subject at hand that it was reported to the moderators (not by me, nor did I do anything to moderate the post myself as I knew I'd end up accused of further "prejudice").
-
(http://i.imgur.com/M1iQ2.gif)
-
(http://i.imgur.com/M1iQ2.gif)
This is not a constructive post.
I would go further, and say it is so nonconstructive as to be inflammatory.
I would earnestly ask you to please reconsider whether that is what you want to be your reply.
-
On the contrary to what I did which was to actually give proof she was factually wrong, I keep being insulted and my post got edited. My shaking head response is most fitting.
What I want to be my reply is that I actually said why I wanted to post a drawing, what it meant, and offered an alternative to the picture she thought it was sexist, so it would skewer what I meant, which I now modified to redirect the discussion back to where I always intended it to be:
Would it make sense we would actually explore which options are best and, only after, vote on them? It does to me.
(http://www.pd4pic.com/images/cartoon-shopping-cart-grocery-animal-shelves.png)
-
The rhetoric in this thread has become toxic. Delfos, your responses to Allama are flamebait. While the Ecclesia has always been accepting of open, candid debate, your condescension, playing victim, and utter disregard for people's personal feelings is inappropriate for this legislature, and the forum's terms of service.
I am locking this thread, and consider this a warning.