I have not insulted any of them.
Quite the opposite, and they are “supposed to be” held to a higher standard.
Did you see what @The_Judge posted to me?
For the record, I respond to every piece of correspondence I receive, whether on the forums, reddit, EVEmail, email, Twitter or Facebook.
I responded an hour ago to someone who has been following this thread, actually.
2 Likes
“Veteran lawyer” , eh?
No, I did not say that.
I’ve already told you: I want you to run competently.
If you’re sincere in your intentions as a reform candidate, then you owe it to the people whose interests you hope to represent to do your best to be a competent, capable candidate. You owe it to them to not burn your bridges before you’re even at the stage of ‘CCP has cleared me for the election’. The people who will get behind you deserve a candidate who, if elected, has not already destroyed any chances of being successful. And that’s the direction you’re heading in.
I don’t know how you intend to convince CCP that abolishing the CSM is the right move, but even without that, if you intend to have any success in giving feedback and advice, you need to be able to work with the rest of the CSM. You need to be able to discuss things with them in a constructive manner, so that the CSM as a body can game out how things happen, give one another feedback and vet one another’s ideas before those ideas get presented to CCP. If you make these people your enemies—your enemies, personally, because you are making it personal here in this thread—then you will get nothing done.
The rest of the CSM will oppose you by reflex, and they will have better relationships with CCP than you will, because they’re good at building relationships. That’s why they’re where they are in life, and in EVE, completely outside of the CSM. Look at the list.
Steve Ronuken’s had years of relationship building with the devs. Ditto Suitonia, Judge, Aryth, Jin’taan, Innominate… Brisc’s entire career is about being able to form and maintain relationships. Sort knows these guys for years on and off the CSM, even if he pisses the devs off on the regular. Killah’s an experienced FC in a major coalition, a job that needs the ability to lead and maintain relationships and work with others. Merk is a corp CEO—again, all about building and maintaining relationships.
Anyone else who gets elected will get elected because they’re good at making connections with people. You’re not displaying that kind of acumen. You’re displaying just the opposite, and your potential voters need you to be better than that.
You’re also presenting these assertions without hard evidence to back them up. I can promise you right now, if you do this on the CSM, Aryth alone will eat you alive. You will make a statement, and he will have the hard numbers to refute it, complete with sourcing and references sufficent for a professional presentation. The others won’t be far behind on having the cold, hard facts at their fingertips whenever they make a statement about something.
You want to do this. That’s good! That’s the biggest hurdle, man. But if you’re gonna do it? You’re asking people to trust you. You’re asking people to make you their voice.
You need to do it right. You need to not half-ass this. I’m not trying to stop you. I’m trying to get it through your head that if you’re gonna do this, you need to do a much, much better job of it.
5 Likes
Yes, I’ve been an attorney for 7 years.
Thanks for clarifying that you did not mean that.
So can you answer the other question? If elected, do you intend to pay your own way to Iceland for the two summits and refuse paid travel/accomodations?
7 years does not qualify as veterancy in jurisprudence.
You should have known better than to ask a “so you are saying” query, when you already know I did not say so, and its an inadmissable leading question. Faceplanting that was as stupidly easy by saying truthfully I did not say so, as it was a stupid question.
If elected, I do not intend to travel to Iceland Summits at all. I will however participate via internet as required of a CSM member.
And you should know better than to assume the standards for criminal law apply anywhere else, or to act like they do.
1 Like
Wat.
This is not a criminal case, nor a court of law of any jurisdiction.
“So you are saying” assertions, even as a question are always a logical and argumentative fallacy, anywhere.
7 years in any profession is sufficient to call oneselves a veteran. But you’ll note that the entire sentence was “veteran lawyer and politician.” I’ve been involved in politics since 1995, actively in political work in Washington since 2003, and ran for office twice. That’s sufficient to establish my bonafides and you are literally the first person to ever question my competence at my day job.
It would have been easier if you had just said that when I asked if you were refusing to attend the summit in person. You could have simply said “yes” and then we wouldn’t have had to have the extra posting.
You seem to think that every question asked of you is some kind of trap to which you cannot give a straight answer.
3 Likes
The funny thing is, I didn’t make a “so you are saying” assertion.
I literally asked “Are you saying…?” because I was legitimately unclear on what exactly you were trying to convey.
1 Like
Any argument to something being ‘inadmissable[sic]’ requires it to be admitted by some admitting authority after being submitted to that authority, ie: the judge in a courtroom. You know what’s ‘admissible’ in open discussion?
Any-damned-thing.
By the way, remember when I said I advised against being a pedantic jerk about the i/e thing in ‘council’? Here’s why:
‘inadmissible’ is an -ible, not an -able. So now, after harping on someone’s spelling mistake, you’ve made one of your own. In a piece of software that has a built-in spellcheck. If you’re still on your phone, it would’ve tried to auto-correct it for you.
It’s just not a smart move, unless you know you’re not going to screw something like that up later, yourself. (Like I said: pedantic jerk? RIGHT HERE.)
Should have happened sooner.
A first year law student knows not to ask leading questions per “so you are saying”. Unless the questioned is lying and trips themself up, and even then, it is an argumentative/logical fallacy.
Do not mistake me for a liar or an idiot.
I am far from either.
I must have missed where you asked this directly/specifically before. Sorry, but Im dealing with many posts here at a fast rate. I would gladly have saved us both that trouble.
I am a HUGE fan of direct and simple questions. They are so easy, yet weirdly quite few know how to express them, and even fewer to answer them as such.
You say this, yet you’ve referred to something someone has said as “testimony”.
Just noticed this.
The omission of “so” from the query doesnt change or redeme that from an argumentative/logical fallacy, or as a leading question with what followed.
Are you purposefully distorting what he’s saying? ‘You are saying…’ might be leading. Asking you if that is what you are saying is not.
1 Like
Check definition.
It is not exclusive to a court of law.
(Note the esp. part)
I hate the term, but that “depends” on context.
If is always speculative.
Any question with if in it, cannot be considered other than speculative, hence neither simple nor direct.
Only when conclusions are being offered. Asking you ‘is this the case, yes/no?’ is not speculative. It is purely interrogative, as a request for clarification.
Note: You’ve already tried arguing with Rhivre regarding who is or isn’t on our staff. Take a long moment before you decide if you want to argue semantics with the undisputed most pedantic editor at INN.
1 Like
I was not asked that, but I certainly would have prefered it.
I already corrected that thanks to him.
I didnt know that any member of INN can be listed as Author due to how the page is built.
Not true. This is the original question:
This is a binary question. Brisc is asking you ‘is this true?’ as a yes or no proposition. He then continues into speculation, but the question itself is not speculative whatsoever.
Additional note: The ability to say ‘you know what, I got caught up in the argument and misread/misinterpreted what was said, I was wrong’ is a huge asset in the job you’re trying to get. Cultivate it.