On 6/17/2021 5:37 AM, Telna via agora-business wrote: > On 2021-06-14 22:40, Kerim Aydin via agora-business wrote: >> Do you really have any doubt that a finger pointed at me for failing to >> respond to the petition wouldn't have succeeded? We'll never know of >> course. But if I'd defended myself by saying "hey, that wasn't directed >> at me as PM, it was directed at me as a person" that wouldn't have held >> any water - the answer would be "you were the PM, you are you, there's no >> ambiguity, what's the problem?" >> >> If I had been the PM, I would have been forced to respond. But since I >> wasn't the PM, it's somehow retroactively ambiguous? Punished if I am, >> punished if I'm not. >> >> -G. >> > I support the motion to reconsider.
I intend to enter the judgement of CFJ 3916 into moot, with 2 support. Reasons: H. Judge ais523 has followed up to my intent to reconsider with some discussion arguments, but I think eir semantic dissections are missing the forest for the trees somewhat. I think this one of the rare cases where a moot/democracy may be a better determinate of resolving the controversy. It is a matter of post-hoc justification for Agora to consider - if I had been PM at the time of the petition and didn't respond, would Agora have considered it a formal petition, and therefore a penalty? When I thought I was PM back in February, and had counterscammers arrayed against me, I had no doubt they would use every tool in their arsenal, including this one. But maybe I'm wrong! Hence, perhaps, a polling moot. -G.
