"Given that this bill was written in order to protect him from abuse and harassment, and that there is no point in going forward with it without his full support..."
--YAMAN

Not only was it written to protect him, but according to Yaman it depended on Fresh's FULL SUPPORT. If the bill had made Fresh even slightly unhappy it would have been withdrawn.

Amazing.
 

The bill was written to protect him from abuse and support by facilitating a resolution. Since he informed me on Thursday that he was planning to descend on Friday with or without the police's promise of amnesty, there was no point in going forward. Since he has already descended, and the point of the bill was to facilitate that descent while making sure that the police did not employ a deceptive practice, there is no longer a purpose for the bill. You can say what you will about that, but I don't think it's anything more than twisting my words on a bill which, ultimately, does not reflect or represent issues regarding the ASUC during the past year.
 

I don't see what you find particularly twisted about my interpretation of your words (and I don't know what the past year has to do with anything). The linked comment certainly says nothing about him coming down.

This is actually more illuminating. It means the people who claimed credit for bringing him down by having a dialog on Friday were incorrect, since he was planning on coming down anyway.
 

I was responding primarily to anonymous above.