Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
Flem's request for ruling:
Request for Ruling
- Thread starter Grosseschnauzer
- Start date
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
FALCONKATS and Eluvatar, please review and comment.
Draft Opinion:
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I'm not sure about this sentence.
Does it apply to nations that remain in the region but do little else?
I believe that such nations have rights.
Nations that leave TNP without otherwise indicating an intent to be residents are not residents, of course, but nations that remain in TNP but do not participate in our politics should have rights as well.
I would appreciate clarification in this direction.
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
If you red further on in the draft, you'll see that a player who has a nation created in TNP and does anything in game and stays within TNP, or joins the official forums with the intention of being part of TNP, as opposed to a representative of any other region, is a resident for purposes of the Bill of Rights.
I'm trying to exclude the RMB solicitors from being defined as a resident, as well as those who come to the regional forums as representatives of any other region.
If you can think of a better way of crystallizing the distinction, please suggest something. Otherwise we'll be put in the positions of an Associate Justice of the RL US Supreme Court, who once said that although he couldn't define pornography, he knew it when he saw it.
I'm trying to exclude the RMB solicitors from being defined as a resident, as well as those who come to the regional forums as representatives of any other region.
If you can think of a better way of crystallizing the distinction, please suggest something. Otherwise we'll be put in the positions of an Associate Justice of the RL US Supreme Court, who once said that although he couldn't define pornography, he knew it when he saw it.
FALCONKATS
TNPer
i agree with Gross that is why when a nation has been created in TNP it must still wait 30 days to seek office
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
Eluvatar and FALCONKATS, I've tried to add clarity to the question Elu had, and have cleaned up the typos If you concur, please state that, if you dissent, please state, and those will be posted with the opinion in 48 hours.
The Court has received the following request for a ruling from Flemingovia, in his capacity as an Admin of the official forum:
There are two separate issues involved in this request.
First, what is the scope of the protection of The Bill of Rights for those Nations not resident in The North Pacific?
Second, in constitutional terms, what is the scope of authority for the administrators of the official regional forum?
The Bill of Rights, by its terms, protects those who are "resident" in The North Pacific. Not every nation present within TNP at Nationstates is a "resident," and not every "resident" is always within TNP.
Who is a "resident" in terms of TNP law? Primarily those Nations who choose to be here and be a part of the regional society; who conduct their in-game activity as a part of TNP, and who identify with TNP as their home region.
A Nation that is born (or created) in TNP does not automatically have residency. Residency requires both presence and some act consistent with that Nation’s intent to remain and become part of TNP (as opposed to any other region). Thus, acts such as voting or making a proposal in the World Assembly, making or seeking "endorsements" in-game with other Nations within TNP, or modifying their National profile at Nationstates.net while that Nation is within TNP are indications of that intent to be a "resident."[*]
A Nation that enters TNP as a representative or agent of some other region at Nationstates does not become a "resident", because they lack that intention that is necessary for residency. Likewise, a Nation that departs TNP at Nationstates.net with the intention to return and resume residency and is acting for or at the request of TNP authorities retains their residency here, as that Nation has not abandoned its residency.
Absent some legislative action that leads to a broader view of residency, then, a Nation which has not been a "resident" of TNP is not protected under our Bill of Rights until and unless they become a "resident" here. The answer to the first question, therefore, is "None."
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:
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.
Notes
[*] To be clear, this phrasing is intended to exclude the out-of-region solicitors posting on the RMB at Nationstates.net from being defined as a resident, as well as those who come to the regional forums and join as representatives of any other region.
[1] – See http://www.zetaboards.com/tos/
[2] – See http://www.zetaboards.com/tou/
[3] – According to the content of the "Board Rules" currently posted within the forums’ Administator Control Panel, the content of the Board Rules are as follows:
[4] The Bill of Rights provide:
The Court has received the following request for a ruling from Flemingovia, in his capacity as an Admin of the official forum:
There are two separate issues involved in this request.
First, what is the scope of the protection of The Bill of Rights for those Nations not resident in The North Pacific?
Second, in constitutional terms, what is the scope of authority for the administrators of the official regional forum?
The Bill of Rights, by its terms, protects those who are "resident" in The North Pacific. Not every nation present within TNP at Nationstates is a "resident," and not every "resident" is always within TNP.
Who is a "resident" in terms of TNP law? Primarily those Nations who choose to be here and be a part of the regional society; who conduct their in-game activity as a part of TNP, and who identify with TNP as their home region.
A Nation that is born (or created) in TNP does not automatically have residency. Residency requires both presence and some act consistent with that Nation’s intent to remain and become part of TNP (as opposed to any other region). Thus, acts such as voting or making a proposal in the World Assembly, making or seeking "endorsements" in-game with other Nations within TNP, or modifying their National profile at Nationstates.net while that Nation is within TNP are indications of that intent to be a "resident."[*]
A Nation that enters TNP as a representative or agent of some other region at Nationstates does not become a "resident", because they lack that intention that is necessary for residency. Likewise, a Nation that departs TNP at Nationstates.net with the intention to return and resume residency and is acting for or at the request of TNP authorities retains their residency here, as that Nation has not abandoned its residency.
Absent some legislative action that leads to a broader view of residency, then, a Nation which has not been a "resident" of TNP is not protected under our Bill of Rights until and unless they become a "resident" here. The answer to the first question, therefore, is "None."
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:
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.
Notes
[*] To be clear, this phrasing is intended to exclude the out-of-region solicitors posting on the RMB at Nationstates.net from being defined as a resident, as well as those who come to the regional forums and join as representatives of any other region.
[1] – See http://www.zetaboards.com/tos/
[2] – See http://www.zetaboards.com/tou/
[3] – According to the content of the "Board Rules" currently posted within the forums’ Administator Control Panel, the content of the Board Rules are as follows:
[4] The Bill of Rights provide: