Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Nuyan Zahedi
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:13:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Letouk Mernel
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON I think you're on meds.
In a few days time you can see for yourself. Something tells me you'll be a lot more polite in person. Time will tell.
What are the Icelandic laws if a public brawl or fight takes place? What is CCP's stance on it? Cause, judging by the way the forums have exploded and judging by how people are reacting, there might be a fight.
People could be more polite in person. Or not.
I heard Iceland has the oldest democratic parliament of the world, they probably have a rich history of vikings chopping off eachothers' heads in heated debates.
The next meeting in Iceland will be recorded right? I mean, that's very important. CSM should be transparent and all that. -- My blog
|
Anton Marvik
AnTi. Atrocitas
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:14:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Jade Constantine I don't care if 10,000 goons get up on their hind legs and cry primal soliloquies to the moon about this.
Sorry if it chaffs your sense of political correctness Verone...
Further irony. In the same post you can insinuate only Goons are complaining, while "addressing" Verone's (Who is most certainly not a Goon) concerns which mirror those of everyone else.
This is called "psychosis", disconnection from reality.
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:14:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Um... nowhere is it stated any member of the CSM should be muting anyone. Least of all for having an opinion.
To clarify this point with something that was said in another thread which I had to correct: Here is the vote in question and context to the post.
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Jade Constantine
I had clearly explained the process in the previous meeting:
[ 2008.05.31 19:26:41 ] Jade Constantine > let me address the muting stuff [ 2008.05.31 19:26:59 ] Jade Constantine > As chair I would take the following steps on moderation: [ 2008.05.31 19:27:09 ] Jade Constantine > if somebody is disruptive I'd ask them to stop [ 2008.05.31 19:27:20 ] Jade Constantine > if they don't stop I'll eventually give a warning [ 2008.05.31 19:27:25 ] Jade Constantine > then a second warning [ 2008.05.31 19:27:33 ] Jade Constantine > then use the mute function outside of voting [ 2008.05.31 19:27:43 ] Jade Constantine > I hope these are steps that will never be needed
(this led to a vote on the principle of operator rights that confirmed that CSM officers would maintain operator rights)
Stop Lying liar.
This is the vote in question
[2008.05.31 19:31:38 ] Jade Constantine >Everyone in favour of everyone having op rights in the CSM channel say aye : [ 2008.05.31 19:31:44 ] Ankhesentapemkah >Yes for universal op rights. [ 2008.05.31 19:31:45 ] Inanna Zuni >Aye [ 2008.05.31 19:31:52 ] Darius JOHNSON >no [ 2008.05.31 19:31:55 ] Jade Constantine >Nay [ 2008.05.31 19:31:56 ] Serenity Steele >No [ 2008.05.31 19:31:56 ] Dierdra Vaal >aye [ 2008.05.31 19:31:58 ] LaVista Vista >Nay [ 2008.05.31 19:32:04 ] Bane Glorious >gonna go with nay [ 2008.05.31 19:32:21 ] Tusko Hopkins >Aye [ 2008.05.31 19:32:43 ] Jade Constantine >thatĘs a No then ...
So it looks like you are again redefining a vote to suit your needs. Note how there is nothing in that vote that says "The CSM Chairman retains OP rights and the ability to mute others" it simply says that this right should not be given to everyone. It does not say, anywhere that the right should be given to anyone, just that it should not be given to everyone
The discussion then moved on to the template document.
|
Yorda
Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:15:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Jade Constantine I stand by that moderation decision 100%. I don't care if 10,000 goons get up on their hind legs and cry primal soliloquies to the moon about this. If a disruptive CSM member is preventing us getting the business of the meeting done then I believe the Chair has the right to temp mute them to get the business of the vote underway. This wasn't about stopping discussion - the person in question had their say (many times) and their objections were noted - but the group wanted to move to the vote and get it done. Sorry if it chaffs your sense of political correctness Verone, but I believe getting through the agenda items and properly representing the player base that voted for us is more important than listening to pointless circular arguments that have already been stated in the course of the meeting.
Oh man that's a great quote.
|
Pnuka
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:16:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Verone Edited by: Verone on 09/06/2008 17:59:47
Originally by: Jade Constantine 99% of the bad feeling comes from people who for one reason or other have decided they want the CSM to fail. Don't be one of them Verone.
In my eyes, given the amount of putrid adolescent slush that's poured out of the mouths of the very people who should be running the CSM, it's already failed.
As for your other points, I'm not saying that a meeting shouldn't be chaired. I'm questioning what the hell the point is in a meeting when people who're taking part can't put their viewpoints across because they're silenced by an overzealous channel moderator.
I stand by that moderation decision 100%. I don't care if 10,000 goons get up on their hind legs and cry primal soliloquies to the moon about this. If a disruptive CSM member is preventing us getting the business of the meeting done then I believe the Chair has the right to temp mute them to get the business of the vote underway. This wasn't about stopping discussion - the person in question had their say (many times) and their objections were noted - but the group wanted to move to the vote and get it done. Sorry if it chaffs your sense of political correctness Verone, but I believe getting through the agenda items and properly representing the player base that voted for us is more important than listening to pointless circular arguments that have already been stated in the course of the meeting.
I'm 100% standing by my decision to moderate when someone points out something I have done incorrectly and later admit to. Right?
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:17:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Wu Jiun lol. and she just keeps going. like the duracell bunny but... less professional. what i like the most: writing it off as a goon campaing when clearly several members of the council have raised their concerns about her behaviour and so have a lot of other (non-goons) people. how can one be that delusional?
None of the concerns brought up have convinced me that there was anything incorrect about the moderation decision. I stand by it 100%. If CCP think I was wrong they can sack me, if the CSM think I was wrong they can support my motion to make the Chair an elected position and then vote for somebody else. At this point thats all anybody can substantively say on issue. We can have another 1000 goon posts complaining about muting and pretending to care about the process of the CSM but it will make precisely no difference.
I made a call, I stick by it. Move on or keep crying.
Either way the agenda is going forward and we'll see what happens in Iceland.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Baron Levian
Bloodveil BLOOD EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:18:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Verone Edited by: Verone on 09/06/2008 17:59:47
In my eyes, given the amount of putrid adolescent slush that's poured out of the mouths of the very people who should be running the CSM, it's already failed.
CSM with Jade:
[ 2008.06.08 22:02:28 ] LaVista Vista > This is a waste of everybody's time
|
Jacque Custeau
Knights of the Minmatar Republic
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:26:00 -
[188]
I love the way people voted for Hardin's proposition that allows CSM members who are late to a meeting come in after the current agenda item is over.
Quote: 1st issue is can the elected candidate return to a meeting and regain voting rights when the debate moves on to the next item on the agenda
And then Jade's idea of paraphrasing
Quote: alternates can be removed from CSM rep voting status at any time by a candidate arriving at the meeting
-------------------
|
Verone
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:27:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Sorry if it chaffs your sense of political correctness Verone, but I believe getting through the agenda items and properly representing the player base that voted for us is more important than listening to pointless circular arguments that have already been stated in the course of the meeting.
I chuckle at the thought that anyone would even consider me to be concerned about political correctness.
Back to the point in question, I still fail to see where you even remotely used a sense of rational judgement when "Moderating" the meeting in question.
Moreover, it seems to me that this is the first instance of a CSM member using their position to force their voice to be heard over another equally important voice.
When I withdrew from the CSM applicants list, I mused on how long it would be before this kind of thing would occur, sadly I had more faith than I should have and it was misplaced due to the fact a mere matter of weeks into the first council's office, it's already happening.
On a serious note, I'm concerned Jade, extremely concerned.
If you're the elected person who's chosen to represent my voice, and that of the the rest of the community in an office with CCP, in a sensible, well presented and mature way, then how do you think it makes myself and thousands of others feel to see you throwing your toys out of the playpen, and throwing your weight about when you can't get your own way?
And all this, just a couple of weeks into a SIX MONTH term.
I'm concerned Jade, and as someone who you were elected to represent, I have to ask;
You were elected in by the majority vote because people had faith in you to act in a becoming manner of someone given the position of CSM Chairman. How do you intend on repairing the apparently massive damage that's been done to the working relationship between CSM members because of your hasty and overzealous silencing of people who aren't saying what you want to hear?
Please don't take this post as bigotry, because trolling you, I am not.
I'm genuinely concerned where the already visible divide between members of the CSM will lead.
\o/ EON FICTION WRITER OF THE YEAR! \o/
>>> THE LIFE OF AN OUTLAW <<< |
Kallynda Nai
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:28:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Jade Constantine We can have another 1000 goon posts complaining about muting and pretending to care about the process of the CSM but it will make precisely no difference.
What about another 1000 posts from non-goons? I'm a mission running rping carebear who lives in high sec where I can stare at my shiny toys with impunity, and I think you were out of line, reactionary and completely delusional in your "enforcement" of your imaginary powers. I'm shocked and a little dismayed to see that the two goon representatives on the council are outclassing you in spades.
|
|
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:29:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
None of the concerns brought up have convinced me that there was anything incorrect about the moderation decision.
Why not? There are two sides to an argument. "Nuh uh" is not one of them.
Quote: If CCP think I was wrong they can sack me
No, they cannot. There is no provision for that in the CSM document, did you even read the thing?
Quote:
if the CSM think I was wrong they can support my motion to make the Chair an elected position and then vote for somebody else
No, they cannot. Did you even read the CSM document? The CSM brings the issues to CCP. CCP responds. There is no ability to change the CSM document granted to the CSM.
The only way that the chair can be an elected position as current is for you to step down as you promised you would as allowed by the CSM document when you were running where the council would then elect a new chairman.
Why don't you honor your promise? Why instead do you choose to redefine the debate to suit your needs. There is no Fox News on these forums to parrot your reality Jade. All we have is the facts, and they disagree with you.
|
Jita Jolene
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:31:00 -
[192]
Resolutions:
- Darius has an axe to grind, put it away. Read up on what chairmanship means. - Jade will restrain the desire to mute as it is far more damaging than useful. - Everyone there will behave differently next time. Their underwear, like anyone's, are better unrevealed.
As I read the logs I was amazed at the utter deluge of interruptions from half the CSM. I have chaired many similar text chat meetings and the ONLY WAY IT WORKS IS TO SHUT UP until it is your turn to speak.
Everyone will (should) have a turn with the floor, usually granted in the order of requests placed. The job of the chair is to signal when the next person has the floor. When a person is finished speaking (has the floor), they signal to the chair that they relinquish the floor. Nobody else speaks in that interval, including the chair. When that process fails, the person disrupting must be handled or the meeting falls apart quickly.
There was only one person following this protocol, and she gained the attention of the chair with an !. Cheers to the one person doing it right :)
I'll bet all my isk the next meeting is more civil, on all sides.
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:32:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Jacque Custeau I love the way people voted for Hardin's proposition that allows CSM members who are late to a meeting come in after the current agenda item is over.
Quote: 1st issue is can the elected candidate return to a meeting and regain voting rights when the debate moves on to the next item on the agenda
And then Jade's idea of paraphrasing
Quote: alternates can be removed from CSM rep voting status at any time by a candidate arriving at the meeting
Well Jacque ... this is the motion from the agenda:
Quote: 1. Alternates and Voting (if an alternate is empowered to replace a full rep for the meetings does can a rep come back mid-way through and take the alternates place once again?) (Hardin)
I wanted to be sure on precisely what we were agreeing too. As you will note from the chatlog - anytime people questioned my paraphrasing I invited them to restate themselves for the record.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:33:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Goumindong
No, they cannot. There is no provision for that in the CSM document, did you even read the thing?
CCP can indeed remove council members.
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:36:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Verone You were elected in by the majority vote because people had faith in you to act in a becoming manner of someone given the position of CSM Chairman. How do you intend on repairing the apparently massive damage that's been done to the working relationship between CSM members because of your hasty and overzealous silencing of people who aren't saying what you want to hear?
No damage has been done. This is all forum froth and trolling. In reality we'll sit down next week and whenever and continue our job. You are welcome to your opinion that this was "hasty and overzealous" muting. I (and incidentally the V Chair) am of the opinion it was entirely correct muting of a person who had fallen into a pattern of disruptive behaviour in the meeting. I have no opinions about what people say in meetings. Its the when I'm concerned about. As long as they follow the proper order of debate, they respect other recognized speakers and they curtail their interruptions when asked there will be no further problems.
CSM Manifesto 2008 | Destroy Outposts! |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:53:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Darius JOHNSON
Originally by: Goumindong
I am sorry, i was excluding the "eligibility" segment, since Jades post was clearly indicating that they had the power to remove CSMs at their digression rather than if they violated a pre-existing agreement which precluded their involvement in the game.
Though it should be noted that both the documents do not actually provide a manner in which CCP can remove a CSM, only when a player may not run. Technically, since a CSM is no longer running after they have been elected there is no way for CCP to remove them, though i doubt they would care with an EULA violation.
I'll look everything over later. I could have sworn there was some line in there regarding CCP being able to remove people.
I thought so too, but i went and checked and didn't find it. v0v
I could have missed it though
|
Inanna Zuni
The Causality Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:54:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Originally by: Jacque Custeau I love the way people voted for Hardin's proposition that allows CSM members who are late to a meeting come in after the current agenda item is over.
Quote: 1st issue is can the elected candidate return to a meeting and regain voting rights when the debate moves on to the next item on the agenda
And then Jade's idea of paraphrasing
Quote: alternates can be removed from CSM rep voting status at any time by a candidate arriving at the meeting
Well Jacque ... this is the motion from the agenda:
Quote: 1. Alternates and Voting (if an alternate is empowered to replace a full rep for the meetings does can a rep come back mid-way through and take the alternates place once again?) (Hardin)
I wanted to be sure on precisely what we were agreeing too. As you will note from the chatlog - anytime people questioned my paraphrasing I invited them to restate themselves for the record.
And that is the very point I was making when I asked you to stop editorialising. The original motion was a *positive* .. elected reps taking their rightful place .. whereas you were redefining it as a *negative* .. alternates get dumped.
Whilst I am very happy that (some) alternates are in the meeting channel and can step in as required it is the *elected* members who are here to serve the podpilot population for their six-month term, Your 'reworking' made out that the elected members mattered less than the 'oh so close but no tomato' ones, and I saw that as very wrong.
IZ
My principles |
Goumindong
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:57:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Quote: Furthermore, you're stating that you'll continue to do the same thing if you feel that someone is getting in the way of what you have to say, and that you have no problem silencing members of the CSM for no other reason than to be able to talk over them.
Nope thats absolutely not what I said and you know it. Poor play Verone, very poor.
No, that is what you said and you know it. You know it because we have quoted you, in this thread, doing what you did. And you are quoted here in this thread saying you would do the same thing.
So either the record is wrong. And its not, its copy pasted from the logs and formatted officially by the secretary. You were lying when you said that you would do it again. Or you were not lying when you said you would do it again and Verone's interpretation is correct. Neither outcome is very flattering for you.
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 18:59:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Yep since the "vast majority" of posters here are goons with an agenda to promote and are enjoying the simple joy of trolling. And since this "vast majority" = a few dozen individual posters at best its easy to ignore, especially since the motivation of these posters is ridiculously transparent.
Just because goons post on the forum, it doesn't make it false.
Also, I think the reaction I have had from people who contacted me out of the blue on messenger, says it all. Jade, saying something is false doesn't make it true. People have documented your behaviour trough logs. You have only stated that people are wrong.
|
Pnuka
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:02:00 -
[200]
Edited by: Pnuka on 09/06/2008 19:04:10
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Yep since the "vast majority" of posters here are goons with an agenda to promote and are enjoying the simple joy of trolling. And since this "vast majority" = a few dozen individual posters at best its easy to ignore, especially since the motivation of these posters is ridiculously transparent.
Just because goons post on the forum, it doesn't make it false.
Also, I think the reaction I have had from people who contacted me out of the blue on messenger, says it all. Jade, saying something is false doesn't make it true. People have documented your behaviour trough logs. You have only stated that people are wrong.
Whist I personally think Jade was incorrect for a number of reason to mute you I would like to take this particular opportunity to ask you to leave that area well alone. If the Goons or any other alliance/corp represented on the CSM decided to war dec Star Fraction for a slight on the CSM I would expect most of the allaince would do two things. First laugh at people not being able to keep out of game activites out of game and secondly cheers for a free war. And whilst you may wish to quote a certain 80's TV show in regards to your opinion on this subject it is quite clear what you are implying by bringing it up.
Furtheremore I personally feel that the ones at fault is mostly CCP for not providing the CSM will more structure before deploying it as I think most of the arguements, diagrements and time wasting of the last couple of weeks can clearly be placed at thier door for the lack of support in creating this council in regards to the procedural side of the CSM. If there had have been more of it in place the CSM could have got on with representing the people who voted for them straight out the gate rather than it having to spend all this time bickering about simple matter of internal policy.
Maybe if we quote Star Fraction members that think Jade was wrong on a "number" of things he'll listen.
That is Hearthstone here http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=792898
|
|
Liendri
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:17:00 -
[201]
After reading the chatlog i must say that the incident was unlucky and maybe jade was a bit too hasty with the mute, but seriously the way some people smack on Jade is just childish and ridiculous.
|
Wasted Mind
Syntech Research and Development Combined Planetary Union
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:19:00 -
[202]
Aside from the other odd chatting etc that went on gotta say i agree with the following. Sry couldn't help but to notice this one..
Hardin >arriving 5 mins late for a meeting shouldnĘt exclude the democratically elected candidate from not participating
Gotta say i agree with that one post right there. Why the hell would i want an alternate to vote instead of someone who was voted in just cause the guy was 5 minutes late ? Mid vote on topic 1 per say, hardin arrives but doesn't know what's up ? Sure let the alternate vote on that one topic. On to next topic alternate leaves Hardin (in the example) would take over.
|
Darius JOHNSON
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:21:00 -
[203]
Originally by: Wasted Mind Aside from the other odd chatting etc that went on gotta say i agree with the following. Sry couldn't help but to notice this one..
Hardin >arriving 5 mins late for a meeting shouldnĘt exclude the democratically elected candidate from not participating
Gotta say i agree with that one post right there. Why the hell would i want an alternate to vote instead of someone who was voted in just cause the guy was 5 minutes late ? Mid vote on topic 1 per say, hardin arrives but doesn't know what's up ? Sure let the alternate vote on that one topic. On to next topic alternate leaves Hardin (in the example) would take over.
That was precisely how the majority of the council felt about it.
|
Verone
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:22:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Verone on 09/06/2008 19:22:51
Originally by: Jade Constantine Nope thats absolutely not what I said and you know it. Poor play Verone, very poor.
Now you're putting words in my mouth.
Whe you run out of arguments Jade, it boils down to one thing. Apparently I have an issue with you, or Goonfleet have an issue with you, or someone else who disagrees has an issue with you, and doesn't like you and therefore is trying to troll you.
That's not the case in this instance. I still regard you as one of the most respected players in the game, hence the position you've been put in BY THE PLAYERBASE.
If I was trying to troll you, cause you problems or be a pain for you, trust me, you'd know about it and these words would be a lot harsher.
I'm genuinely concerned, because I don't feel that as a chairman, you should be silencing any member of the CSM who wants to speak and has the right to do so.
\o/ EON FICTION WRITER OF THE YEAR! \o/
>>> THE LIFE OF AN OUTLAW <<< |
Phoenus
Body Count Inc. Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:31:00 -
[205]
Verone, myself and you haven't often seen eye to eye in the past, on a whole multitude of issues.
What I will say here though, is that what you have posted in this thread, is 100% spot on, and has been echoed in various channels I sit in.
I haven't been an avid supporter of the whole CSM thing from the start, because it was pretty evident that this is the way it would go. I can't say I'm glad to see myself proven right though.
Jade, just because somebody disagrees with you, does not mean that they have an issue with you, or they are trying to troll you.
|
Joe Starbreaker
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:41:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Jade Constantine I made a call, I stick by it, move on or keep crying.
Either way [I'm] going [to] Iceland.
Fixed that quote for ya.
------------------------------------------------
|
Verone
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:43:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Phoenus I haven't been an avid supporter of the whole CSM thing from the start, because it was pretty evident that this is the way it would go. I can't say I'm glad to see myself proven right though.
Believe me, I'm so glad my opinion changed and I decided to withdraw.
\o/ EON FICTION WRITER OF THE YEAR! \o/
>>> THE LIFE OF AN OUTLAW <<< |
Vantras
Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 19:52:00 -
[208]
<--not a Goon and I completely agree with Verone and by chance-some Goons.
Add the power crazed behavior, obvious attempts at manipulation and spin in re-phrasing resolutions for dramatic effect, and top it off with the over zealous support of a Star Fraction specific agenda and you have a total disaster in the Chairman role. Hard to imagine a worse combination of immaturity, egomania and a total committment to a self serving agenda all bottled up into person sitting in the Chairman seat.
A terrible shame for what could have been a decent social experiement in EVE.
|
Christy Walton
Bloodveil
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 20:05:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Verone So, let me get this straight :
You're pretty much saying that although the vast majority of people who've posted, and whom you chair a body to represent, completely disagree with your treatment of CSM members and are up in arms about it, you see nothing wrong with it and as such you did the correct thing?
Furthermore, you're stating that you'll continue to do the same thing if you feel that someone is getting in the way of what you have to say, and that you have no problem silencing members of the CSM for no other reason than to be able to talk over them.
You have blinders on to the world Jade, and there's something seriously wrong with the CSM and it's goals if you feel that this should be your role.
I feel sorry for Jade. Lost his time, his gf and now his virtual reputation (if he ever had one) Maybe he should resign and let CSM try to recover.
|
Kelsin
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 20:06:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Verone I'm genuinely concerned, because I don't feel that as a chairman, you should be silencing any member of the CSM who wants to speak and has the right to do so.
Whether or not they had the right to do so is the question. It depends on whether there are rules of order or whether any CSM rep can shout whatever they want wheneve they want.
If the chair's job is to lead the meeting and ensure it adheres to rules of order, then it surely is the chair's job to call for silence when participants are out of order.
The question is whether there are rules of order - either implicitly or explicitly - that the participants are supposed to be abiding by.
Serenity Steele may have been using a method of requesting the floor of his own devising, but all the council members should be behaving with that sort of decorum, otherwise we have the parentheticals and exclamations that get in the way of an orderly discussion where everyone has a turn to say their peace.
I don't think the intention is for the CSM chamber to be a place where people shout over each other. And in the end that means someone has to be able to enforce order if the members cannot contain themselves to orderly conduct.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |