Complaints

Grosseschnauzer:
flemingovia:
Bumping for Grosse.

On 14th may charges were filed against me in this office, in addition to a number of moderation reports. It would be good if the attorney general would address this charge, so that I can prepare my defence.

Every time this happens my reputation is damaged, so I hope the court will not simply brush away the charges or use this as a further opportunity to criticise me without giving me opportunity for rejoinder.


I look forward to my day in court.
Click to expand...
Moderation issues as outside the purview of the judiciary, and therefore outside the preview of this Office. This was established in this opinion.

Court Opinion on Residency and Forum Administration:

Turning to the second issue, that is, the authority of Admins, Global Mods, and mods within the official forums as compared to the authority of government officials, requires one to precisely state what that authority is. The Admin have primary responsibility for enforcement of the "terms of service," [1] the "terms of use," [2] and the supplemental forum rules [3] that govern the forums. The forum moderation team has primary authority to enforce that body of rules, while many government officials have a limited amount of authority as forum moderators to assist in their enforcement.

A forum administrator’s primary obligation is to protect the integrity of the designated official forums on behalf of the regional community. If the constitutional process so permit, the members of the forum administration team not otherwise holding a government office, may exercise a very limited form of government power within the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Legal Code, and subject to the protections and limitations provided by the three central documents of TNP law.

Thus, in response to this question:

Specifically, if I as Admin were to preemptively IP ban a player who has no nation in TNP, and presently no account on this forum, what would be the legality of my actions under TNP law?
Click to expand...

the answer depends on whether the grounds for such an action are based upon a perceived threat of violation of the body of forum rules, or a threat of violation of TNP law. If it is the former, then the Admin is acting within the Admin’s proper authority to protect the forums; if it is the latter, then the Admin should secure from an appropriate government official approval under paragraphs 8, 9, and 11 of the Bill of Rights [4] before imposing such a ban from the forums. Inasmuch as there are distinct review processes for these decisions under the Constitution and Bill of Rights as to government decisions, and by the moderation review process put in place by the forum moderation team for the team’s non-governmental decisions, the requirements of due process are met so long as the review processes are followed in good faith. Thus, where the reason for the imposition of an IP ban is based on protecting the integrity of the forums, then the Admin is exercising their core responsibility to the forums and the community. If the IP ban is to further any other governmental policy or purpose, approval by the appropriate "governmental authorities of the region" under paragraphs 8 and 11 of the Bill of Rights is required.
Click to expand...

Complaints about moderation therefore belong to the scope of the forum moderation team and not the government. TNP has followed a tradition that the two are independent of one another, and as to those complant, that is the rule that is applied.
Click to expand...
I have filed my request with the moderation team and while Flem has inappropriately closed the thread, I had requested your response there.....
 
Grosseschnauzer:
This is for governmental issues, and you have received your response in the moderation area.
Click to expand...
It was a conflicting response. You had instructed them to reduce my warning to a caution, and nothing was done.
 
Let me be perfectly clear -- this topic is about forum moderation and not any matter of government jurisdiction. That means there is no remedy in the judicial system for complaints about forum moderation. The forum moderation team adopted procedures on such matters, and they have been deemed by the Court to meet due process concerns. If a remedy is appropriate it will come from that body.
Matter closed.
 
Due to time demands, it is taking long to review these two matters than I had expected. If nothing new arises, I should be able to get to them tomorrow.
 
Eluvatar:
The COPS definition lists some direct actions (deletion of posts, forums, or spamming them) and then says "or any other act of such kind." In my personal opinion, reporting to Invisionfree does not match that definition.
Click to expand...
Since the forum servers are run by InvisionFree Admins, they have every right to delete a forum that does not comply with their own rules. Read the TOS / TOU.
 
9. "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of citizens with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Click to expand...

10.) Trying to Damage me into saying my age, stalking or trying to tell Admins my age wheater or not my age would make me have to leave TNP forums and invoke my RA.
 
Tyler:
9. "Election fraud" is defined as the willful deception of citizens with regards to the candidates running, the time and venue of the elections, or the requirements and methods by which one may be eligible to vote or run for office.
10. “Fraud” is defined as an intentional deception, by falsehood or omission, made for some benefit or to damage another individual.
Click to expand...

10.) Trying to Damage me into saying my age, stalking or trying to tell Admins my age wheater or not my age would make me have to leave TNP forums and invoke my RA.
Click to expand...
If your age wouldn't make you have to leave the forums, why hide it?
 
Mr. Attorney General,

I have a few questions for you that I hope you will clear up.

Can we agree that charges brought forth against our sitting delegate should be addressed in the most expeditious manner? A delegate under suspicion of these charges shall have their ability to lead our region until the charges have been resolved. If our delegate's ability to lead is impaired this impacts all of us in TNP. My hope is that your concerns are not attempts to stall the matter until such time as to hope people will forget about the charges.

As regards to bias, you state:

If I am unable to ascertain a fair, free and unbiased panel on this complaint, then no purpose will be served to allow an indictment to be filed with the Court since the process would have been corrupted by Associate Justice Blue Wolf's apparent actions as already posted in the public areas of the forum as well as materials that have been posted for public view.
Click to expand...

However, one of the recused justices has continually asserted that you are not free from bias in this case and has made reference to you stepping down on a number of occasions. I believe it's a bit disingenuous to demand the court be unbiased when your bias has been and continues to be questioned and yet you have not decided to recuse yourself to remove even a hint of prejudice.

Therefore, I ask that you appoint a temporary AG who is not biased in this matter and who can represent The North Pacific in this matter against the delegate. Failure to appoint a temporary AG would signal to the residents of this region that you believe yourself to be the only one who can determine bias and that none should ever question your objectivity. Indeed, questioning your objectivity will be met with silence.

One could also make the argument that failure to appoint a temporary AG signals your desire to ensure the charges against Eluvatar do not make it to the courtroom regardless of their merit. It is my hope that you will consider appointing a temporary prosecutor in this case so that any notion of your bias can be removed.

One further question - the court is allowed to appoint a temporary officer in the event of a conflict of interest. In this complaint, it appears both justices did not appoint a temporary officer prior to recusing themselves leaving us with a legal conundrum. In the event that the winner of the special election is also similarly biased and will need to recuse him/herself in this case will you have a problem with their appointing a temporary officer prior to recusing themselves. Before answering I'd like to refer you to Chapter 3, Section 2, Sub. 8 which states:
8. If there is a vacancy on the Court, or any Justice is unavailable or has a conflict of interest the remaining Justices will promptly appoint a hearing officer to participate as temporary Justices.
Click to expand...

Lastly, if all three justices are biased then I propose the following to expedite things if all three justices agree...Blue Wolf will withdraw his complaint. A member of the RA will be free to put forth the same complaint at which time the justices will not as yet recused themselves from the matter seeing as it is a new complaint albeit substantively the same. At which time, the three justices shall select for themselves in unanimity a temporary officer who is not biased in this case.

If that were to happen, would you object to presenting the merits of this case pursuant to the duties of your office? And please expound upon your answer either way.
 
I'm waiting for the new constitution to be officially declared adopted before announcing or deciding any actions. Since the new constitution brings back civil cases as an alternative to criminal cases. it will allow this office to focus on real criminal cases that fit within the new constitutional and legal code framework.

(In addition, I have been busy in RL and having to address some admin matters that have nor been made public for forum security reasons. But be assured there has been some very serious issues and those have had to take priority. In addition, with flem on vacation, I'm just about the only admin available much of the time and catching up on admin tasks that could have been handled by others that weren't has taken a big chunk of whatever time I have had. And not everyone lives in NS 24/7. So chill. And if I didn't have to wade through all the clutter, I'd get to the meaningful stuff sooner.)
 
I am locking this thread and revising the process to file matters with the AG's office.

The new complaint area will only be used to start a request to the Attorney General's office, and to provide evidence or links to evidence or to note that evidence is being forwarded by PM. Each matter docketed will have its own thread. A new thread to initiate matters for the Attorney General's office will be opened in the new area.

Any blabber or third party comments should be put in a separate thread outside the complaint area.
 
As far as I can tell, I have captured and moved any potential matter still pending into the new area for review by this office.

If you feel that something that is a serious, legitimate submission has been overlooked then follow the procedures for submitting a new matter in the Complaint area under the newly posted procedure, and we'll deal with it that way. Anything else can stay out of there.

Since this is no longer the current complaint thread, it is also being unpinned at this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top