On 9/7/05, Karl <greenley+cam@...> wrote:
>
> On that matter- what is your opinion on the suggestion that, after
> Jason's punishment is up, the RST will likely discard any application tha=
t
> he submits for DST for an additional six months on the sole basis that he
> recently was subjected to a disciplinary action. Is this a fair use of th=
e
> screening process, or is it simply adding insult to injury?
If and only if the disciplinary action itself is the *sole* reason for
removing his application, then I do not think I would personally take
the same action. (There, did I qualify that one enough?)
To pick another example, though, which is pure conjecture and probably
not true, if I were to look at the overall situation and think that
this was not an isolated incident, and believe that Jason was not
prepared to work with the ST chain in general, then I might consider
removing his application.
So I guess the real answer is that without knowing a lot more, I
couldn't really say if I think it's "fair" or not. It's definitely
within Jon's authority to decide, though, and given the controversy
and the massive activity since the action that was appealed, I don't
think either decision is likely to be "clearly incorrect" (the
criteria for an appeal).
--=20
Wes Contreras, US2002022038
US National Coordinator
cam.usnc@...
http://www.camarilla.us/