Search results

I, the leader of The North Pacific nation of Blue Wolf II, pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war...

No, no. Not defender. Fenda.

But it is Condemned, so clearly a Commended is needed to offset that.

For. As with all Fenda regions, this one deserves a commend, especially since they have changed their ways and embraced peace and love.

Pretty much until an Admin takes an interest and decides to check out your IP to make sure it's real and doesn't match any other accounts. In the past, this could take hours to months, depending on who the Admin was doing the checks.

I, the leader of The North Pacific nation of Blue Wolf II, pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war...

I'm going to take the deafening silence coming from the Admin Team to mean that I am correct, and that those people don't exist. So part of the justification for this ban, right off the bat, is based upon a complete lie. Now, if the Admin Team had to lie about their reasoning, that sort of...

Wait, so Cormac gets all his claims addressed in a sentence by sentence break down and yet no one can answer my one simple question of who those three mystery people are that Scar supposedly drove off Nationstates? ...It's because those people don't exist, isn't it?

I'd still like to know what players "left the game" because of the leak indirectly caused by Scardino, and directly caused by Limitless, who isn't banned from these forums. This seems to be the real reason why Scardino was banned, and if it was simply the theft of IP information, why isn't...

I call bullshit. The Admins only know it was Scardino who obtained this information because I, in good faith, told them. Now they are betraying that trust to lash out at Scardino after a full decade. Also, trying to link this incident with Hersfold's retirement is very bad form, Elu. I've seen...

I believe the appropriate amount of time has now passed. I would like to, at this time, appeal this decision.

I nominate Grosseschnauzer.

What are you guys talking about? We already know who they sent. R3n, of course. :yes:

Kinky.

I have an appeal in process that must now be considered by the whole Court and can not be dismissed by any one Justice alone, in accordance with Court Rules.

Ah, but the Court itself ignored the Bill of Rights, the prior Court ruling made by COE, and several required court procedures throughout this case. The "5-minute" part might be hyperbole, but it is no exaggeration to say that this opened several massive holes in the Criminal Courtroom...

Ivan, you seem to be purposefully confusing Tomb "being around" with Tomb being defended. Tomb got no defense and he never explicitly stated that his wish was to not be defended. Just the opposite can be inferred, since he appointed three people to represent him. Clearly he wished to be...

Irrelevant. The case still opened the door for citizens to be tried without a Defense argument. This would allow people who are tried in absentia, who automatically plea "Not Guilty" by not showing up, to be ruled upon with no one speaking in their Defense, a grave misjustice. It would also...

That's not applicable nor grounds for denying my appeal, Plembobria. According to the Court's own rules, the appeal must now be considered by the Court as a whole. Or are we just going to ignore the rules whenever it fits the agenda of the day? Again, I do not understand the Court and...

It's been very clear from the start that I am not asking the Court to rule on the Tomb vs. TNP case, only the decision that arose from it. I am not appealing the Court decision on Tomb's case, and if Plembobria had bothered to even glance at the request, that would have been made abundantly...

With no words spoken in defense of his innocence, Tomb's "Defense" was in name only.

I was legally in the wrong, so said the Court, when I banned Govinda for spamming. I wasn't taken to court, charged with Gross Misconduct, and ruled on without anyone defending me.

Well, this is a bit different than one's specific nation being banned from the region. This last legal ruling has established that the Court may rule on any trial after hearing only from the Prosecution, as such all of us may be potentially effected. A Right to a Fair Trial is a passive right...

Attorney General, this is not a criminal matter. There is no "chief prosecutor", there are no "prosecutorial processes". While it might be true that you could be called on to provide "legal counsel" to the three Justices of the Court, they can literally call upon any citizen to provide such...

Well, at least we've reached the conclusion that the Court's rather lackluster of an explanation of how they determined guilt in this case would be grounds, in and of itself, for an appeal and that future Courts should probably invest the time to give a reasonable explanation for their findings...

Well, the Bill of Rights does say "a Nation is presumed innocent unless guilt is proven to the fact finder by reasonably certain evidence." A Court, "the fact finder", failing to explain how they reached their conclusion of guilt, "reasonably certain evidence", could be construed to be in...

Which is irrelevant, because my request concerns the policy laid down by the current Justices, not by the Office of the Attorney General. Your involvement in this request, as Attorney General, is peripheral, at best. Ivan, you have no more right to post here on this matter than any other...

Well, strictly speaking, finding people guilty with the reasoning of "because they are guilty" is usually pretty bad form. It could be argued that such a reasoning doesn't establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, thus opening the door to a mistrial.