Regarding IRC Logs and the Criminal Organizations Law

[Escade]

So since I've become delegate of TSP, I've noticed the Belschaft has been a strong proponent of the get rid of Unibot or UDL party.  What I find troubling about this is the lack of any adherence to an actual democratic law or actual reason to do so but rather a focus on personal grievances and misusing power by the people who focus on this (such as a unilateral ban or suggestion of it). 

 

Regardless of the personal feelings involved, it's still imperative that due democratic and judicial procedures be followed. Which is why I'd like to see more power in the hands of the court so  that there are three branches of government balancing each other out.  It's not about the particular person or organization being targeted. It's actually about the focus on "removing undesirable elements" simply because they have an opposing viewpoint which is dangerous in any society even if its an online one.  

 

Unfortunately, because Belschaft isn't the only one implicated which is why I haven't posted it right away because I prefer people to get a chance to address their mistakes or bad behavior before publicly calling them out on it. 

 

Note to the cabinet, in some ways I feel responsible for the potential misuse of this act because in the moderation related PMs I mentioned that if anyone needed to be removed from TSP it should be done in a legal way. What I didn't mean was to create laws that are ambiguous enough to to then be misused but rather that there be evidence\due process\etc.


This is a rather important issue because in one direction TSP starts declaring one person\organization "hostile" and bans their members, then others, then others until only a small cadre of people remain who all agree with one another.  Everyone in TSP has loyalty to TSP until absolutely proven otherwise.  We cannot get in the practice of "catching criminals" before they come into existence.

 

It is my understanding that sharing logs is considered rude in NS.  Every person councils against it. The log itself only shows that Belschaft is intent on targeting UDL as a hostile organization with the only proof he has being their statement and his opinion that people associated with UDL cannot be loyal to TSP. That is the kind of thinking that I find troubling.  We need to focus on "innocent before guilty" not just in the case of UDL but in any case such as that of a legally elected delegate who is accused of being a sleeper agent due to this toxic culture.

 

*As Hileville and a many others know, my computer was hacked around the time of the whole "delegate is a sleeper agent" although I didn't realize the extent until later. My mouse moved on its own and windows were opened\closed and other troubling things.  Hileville and QuietDad and a friend of mine helped me set up security so things like that didn't happen. Anyone who implies they are watching me in any way creeps the heck out of me. 

 

 

[Rebel-topia]

I think, if you're going to call someone out on something, then send them the logs in a PM, and THEN ask if they mind if they are shared publicly. Thats really the only way to do it.

[Sandaoguo]

I don't doubt that Belschaft plans on using the Charter amendments to go after the UDL. Anybody paying attention knows that's the entire reason he wrote the law. But I don't know what we can do about it. I'm being attacked and my patriotism questioned because I suggest that the Assembly could misuse or be duped into misusing the law. Every suggestion of a definition of hostility that prevents politicization is rejected by Belschaft, because the only thing he wants to use the law for is to attack his enemies. We've all seen this happen in other regions. It's a reversion to type for gameplayers to pass laws like this under the guise of security and protecting the integrity of the community. But it's impolite to suggest publicly that Belschaft, let alone any random TSPer, isn't a perfect unbiased person who would never act politically and go after people for petty personal reasons.

 

Since none of the changes suggested in the past few days are likely to go into effect, and repeal is definitely not going to happen, the only thing we  can do is set an Executive Policy on when the Cabinet will agree to declare a group hostile to TSP. We can't force something through the Assembly, but a majority of us (preferably all of us) can limit how we will act. So I think we should revisit my Executive Policy to basically define hostility, as far as the Cabinet is concerned, to basically what Tsunamy defined it as, fixing the issues I brought up in the debate thread.

[Southern Bellz]

I was more or less fine with the law as it stands.  I do not think the assembly would be able to declare the UDL as a hostile group (politically, not legally), and honestly, I don't really care what anyone's motives are anymore.  Everyone thinks differently and has different backgrounds, and I know how exhausting it is to have your motives questioned.

 

But considering this is a huge distraction, I am willing to put my weight behind a repeal IF there is a bill that does something similar to groups we have declared war on.  We can't override the assembly, but as a collective we have huge political influence and it is our job to use that influence in the assembly if we have to.

[Sandaoguo]

I could support a persona non grata for groups we are at war with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Southern Bellz]

Also in regards to the logs.  Log sharing is rude because it's taking a personal conversation public.  

 

You have already done that.  You are making some very serious statements, and I think all of us have had enough on the speculation of people's motives.  Talking about logs without producing them, is adding fuel to a fire that we need to put out. 

 

This is a cabinet forum, not a public one.  You see logs posted of relevant matters of the region with regards to the Sunshine law.  You don't have to post it publicly, but I think the cabinet deserves to know.

[Escade]

I'm not in the habit of posting personal conversations unless the person in question doesn't cease and desist from their behavior.  I don't have any relationship with Belschaft, neither a working one nor a friendly one. I don't think he's evil but rather a highly obstinate individual who promotes a conservative, restrictive, and punitive TSP.  His "loyalty" to TSP is an answer to any questionable behavior and its similar to the rhetoric of "patriots don't question the dissolution of habeas corpus."

 

Here is the relevant section for the purpose of the cabinet having this in the case that UDL comes up as a convenient target.  The leaking of this in any form would be detrimental to us in terms of foreign relations and of course the sanctity of the cabinet. 

 

<Bel> Hmm.. how would you respond to using Article 9 vs. UDL at this point? Cos I'm getting pretty sick of them
 
<Escade> Jesus Christ Bel, don't go Orweill on my right now
 
<Bel> http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo202...humbna.png
 
<Bel> Honestly, I don't think it is possible to be loyal to TSP and UDL
 
<Escade> I don't think its possible to be in any other region\organization and be loyal to TSP
 
<Bel> I think it is, if there are no conflicting interests
 
<Bel> OSI/TSP, or TNP/TSP for example
 
<Bel> UDL however is working against our interests. Their leaders hate us and seek our destruction.
 
<Escade> Proof?
 
<Escade> Evidence?
 
<Escade> Due process?
 
<Escade> Law?
 
<Escade> Democracy?
 
<Bel> What due process? UDL is a foreign organisation. What is the due process behind declaring war on a region?
 
<Bel> The question is, is UDL hostile to TSP?
 
<Bel> Considering their public statements, the actions of their members
 
<Escade> I don't know Bel, I think you have a personal grievance with them
 
<Escade> or certain of their members
 
<Escade> While I may not like certain members or their statement, I don't see what they've done to be considered anymore enemies then some others
 
<Bel> My grievances stem from their actions in relation to TSP. I have no other interests or loyalties in NS, nothing else to hold against them
 
* Bel has quit (Ping timeout: 198 seconds)
 
* Disconnected ()
 
 
* Loaded log from Fri Feb 28 20:23:36 2014

[Sandaoguo]

I think Bel (and quite a few other people, tbh) just has a terrible view of what is actually harmful to TSP. It all boils down to what I was talking about months ago: people take things too personally. The UDL is literally zero threat to TSP. They could call us all Nazi Satan worshipers who sacrifice starving babies to Cthulhu, and they still would be zero threat to TSP. Releasing a harsh statement doesn't make a group a serious security threat. A diplomatic falling out isn't a declaration of war. People need to realize this and remember to take a step back and look at the broad picture.

 

I think I'm going to write a little foreign policy doctrine on when hostility becomes a security threat.

[Southern Bellz]

I think Bel (and quite a few other people, tbh) just has a terrible view of what is actually harmful to TSP. It all boils down to what I was talking about months ago: people take things too personally. The UDL is literally zero threat to TSP. They could call us all Nazi Satan worshipers who sacrifice starving babies to Cthulhu, and they still would be zero threat to TSP. Releasing a harsh statement doesn't make a group a serious security threat. A diplomatic falling out isn't a declaration of war. People need to realize this and remember to take a step back and look at the broad picture.

 

I think I'm going to write a little foreign policy doctrine on when hostility becomes a security threat.

 

Can you write a version of the law so we can try to repeal and replace first?