WITHDRAWN: The IRC Officializing Act

[Alvino Castillon]

I would like to propose an addition to the laws that govern the North Pacific.

We've been having a debate over whether or not #tnp on Esper.net is an official channel for TNP or not. A lot of people use it as the main chat for the North Pacific and in fact, one of the options to get on the Map is to be active in the channel #tnp. With the debate still ongoing, I believe we should finally make a decision on which channel is the one the North Pacific supports.

Therefore, I propose the following:

36. The Regional Government of the North Pacific recognizes the Internet Relay Channel #tnp on Esper.net as the official channel for the North Pacific.

37. The Regional Government of the North Pacific will not change the OP structure of #tnp on Esper.net.

38. The Regional Government of the North Pacific recognizes the Internet Relay Channel #tnp-cabinet on Esper.net as the official regional government channel for the North Pacific.

39. #tnp and #tnp-cabinet may be used to make announcements regarding the regional government so long as a post is made in the proper part of the regional forums of the North Pacific.

40. Should any official channel of the North Pacific become unregistered or fall under the ownership of someone not approved by the Regional Government of the North Pacific, that channel will no longer be recognized as an official channel of the North Pacific.

Any questions, comments, concerns, or criticism would be very helpful.

 

[Kingborough]

I like this, but I would suggest an extra clause;

41. The use of and conservations that take place in the IRC channel of #TNP on Esper.net will be independent from the criminal code, bill of rights, constitution or any other legal documents of the North Pacific's government.

 

[Gaspo]

There are some wording issues; I will work on them tomorrow.

 

[Eluvatar]

I like this, but I would suggest an extra clause;

41. The use of and conservations that take place in the IRC channel of #TNP on Esper.net will be independent from the criminal code, bill of rights, constitution or any other legal documents of the North Pacific's government.

What is this intended to accomplish?

 

[Gaspo]

The idea of it is to ensure that the administration of #tnp is kept separate from regional affairs, as is the case with forum administration. It's not worded ideally, though; I'm drafting a version as we speak (drunkenly) which I will put forward tomorrow.

 

[DRUK]

I like this, but I would suggest an extra clause;

41. The use of and conservations that take place in the IRC channel of #TNP on Esper.net will be independent from the criminal code, bill of rights, constitution or any other legal documents of the North Pacific's government.

However, I think there may be instances, where one can take advantage of this rule by verbally harassing one of the members in our IRC chatroom, privately or publicly. Therefore, I cannot say I fully agree to this clause.

The independence of all conversations from the IRC must be proclaimed on a conditional basis.

 

[Cove]

This legislation has my support.

 

[Alvino Castillon]

I will not support this with Clause 37 contained. I don't believe the government should ever have the right to forcibly change the structure.

Fair point... it should be the Owner's decision.

Edited to reflect changes.

EDIT: Thank you very much Jamie.

 

[Govindia]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

 

[DRUK]

"9. #tnp and #tnp-cabinet may be used to make announcements regarding the regional government so long as a post is made in the proper part of the regional forums of the North Pacific."

I an posting this correction to avoid the possibility of miscommunication.
If no one is on #tnp-cabinet and if the announcement is made on that channel, no one will be notified of it.
Therefore, it is best, for maximum communication, for announcements to be made on both channels.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

I like this idea, though generally I think announcements need to me made on the forum as well. Other than that, I think it's a good idea to make it clear that the #tnp channel is our official channel.

Some users like to argue against that channels use simply because they are banned due to poor behaviour.

 

[Kingborough]

My proposed clause does have some flaws, so I'll be waiting on Gaspo's knowledgable suggestions to fix it but basically what it means to achieve is making sure the court can't rule that people have to be banned from the IRC, for example. IRC conversations would still be usable as evidence but the court should not have to power to rule that Person X should be banned/unbanned from IRC.

 

[Gaspo]

Precisely. I happen to believe that the courts shouldn't be able to ban people from these forums, either, but that's a separate issue and one which I don't think needs going into. It's akin to the death penalty for someone's participation in our game, and we ought to try to be inclusive. If they break the laws, we should be removing them from the RA or the region, not completely removing them from society. If they break forum rules, then they should get removed. But again, I digress. Updated legislation is coming later today.

 

[Flemingovia]

This is as daft an idea as I have ever come across.

our IRC channel already has three levels of governance: it's listing on the RMB, which can be removed, ops in the channel, and peer pressure. If the channel gets out of order, we can vote with our feet.

Once you regulate the channel, our laws and rights come into play there. You cannot pick and choose where the bill of rights starts and ends: exclude people from #tnp without due process, and their rights have been broken ... if #tnp becomes subject to our laws.

This is why we already have Govindia seeking to influence the law's drafting to give him a legal basis for readmission to #tnp, and other people in #tnp saying that this law needs to be carefully drafted in order to keep govindia out:

<stgeorge>: this irc act in the RA
<stgeorge>: needs to be airtight
<stgeorge>: no loopholes that would allow Gov back in

Let's not create laws where we do not have to. and let's not create laws which contradict out bill of rights.

 

[Gaspo]

I can't, and won't, support a version of this bill that does anything other than codify once and for all which IRC channel is and is not the official TNP channel, and clearly establish the separate administration and governance of that channel from the politics of the region (same as forum administration here is). I'm working on a new draft limited to those specific issues; we'll see about putting that forward. The bill of rights and so forth doesn't need to come into it at all; they're completely unrelated. I think the end goal of this legislation, Flem, is to end the stupid debates about "well I'm in xyz channel that's MY channel that I think is the proper TNP channel". Those conversations are stupid, and if a simple piece of legislation can resolve them, I could support it.

This bill doesn't do that, though. This bill is like trying to declare English as a country's official language, by using a massive judicial adjustment bill that also infringes on rights and makes tax collection impossible. Or something equally ridiculous.

Tl;dr the goal is good, but it's burdened with too much other crap. Simple, direct, explicit legislation might be better, and I will be proposing something along those lines later today.

 

[Govindia]

This is as daft an idea as I have ever come across.

our IRC channel already has three levels of governance: it's listing on the RMB, which can be removed, ops in the channel, and peer pressure. If the channel gets out of order, we can vote with our feet.

Once you regulate the channel, our laws and rights come into play there. You cannot pick and choose where the bill of rights starts and ends: exclude people from #tnp without due process, and their rights have been broken ... if #tnp becomes subject to our laws.

This is why we already have Govindia seeking to influence the law's drafting to give him a legal basis for readmission to #tnp, and other people in #tnp saying that this law needs to be carefully drafted in order to keep govindia out:

<stgeorge>: this irc act in the RA
<stgeorge>: needs to be airtight
<stgeorge>: no loopholes that would allow Gov back in

Let's not create laws where we do not have to. and let's not create laws which contradict out bill of rights.

I love how:

1. My original post and concerns in this thread were not yet showing up here from post moderation.
2. Stgeorge being a hypocrite when it comes to civil rights of people he doesn't like. So much for Equality and Fairness.

 

[Gaspo]

I like how you take something you disagree with and make it all about you, so that you can play the martyr. This isn't a bill about you; the misguided comments of one individual shouldn't be the sole basis for shooting down this legislation.

 

[St George]

2. Stgeorge being a hypocrite when it comes to civil rights of people he doesn't like. So much for Equality and Fairness.

Show me where I have said I am in favour of total equality and fairness, and you might, if you squint a teeny tiny bit, have a point.

But I've never made a post like that, and do indeed, think you should be excluded from #tnp.

Why? I think we all know why.

Oh, and thank you Flem for posting that. I don't know why you considered it necessary but whatever. In the future though, if you plan on posting anything I've said in #tnp on these forums, I'd appreciate a head's up so, you know, I can defend myself from stalkers calling me a hypocrite.

 

[Govindia]

2. Stgeorge being a hypocrite when it comes to civil rights of people he doesn't like. So much for Equality and Fairness.

Show me where I have said I am in favour of total equality and fairness, and you might, if you squint a teeny tiny bit, have a point.

But I've never made a post like that, and do indeed, think you should be excluded from #tnp.

Why? I think we all know why.

Oh, and thank you Flem for posting that. I don't know why you considered it necessary but whatever. In the future though, if you plan on posting anything I've said in #tnp on these forums, I'd appreciate a head's up so, you know, I can defend myself from stalkers calling me a hypocrite.

Oh, why is that?

I will not tolerate you or others continuing to spread libel about me with your statements. Your behaviour is exactly why you should not be allowed in #tnp and why I should not be excluded.

 

[Govindia]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

for reference.

 

[St George]

2. Stgeorge being a hypocrite when it comes to civil rights of people he doesn't like. So much for Equality and Fairness.

Show me where I have said I am in favour of total equality and fairness, and you might, if you squint a teeny tiny bit, have a point.

But I've never made a post like that, and do indeed, think you should be excluded from #tnp.

Why? I think we all know why.

Oh, and thank you Flem for posting that. I don't know why you considered it necessary but whatever. In the future though, if you plan on posting anything I've said in #tnp on these forums, I'd appreciate a head's up so, you know, I can defend myself from stalkers calling me a hypocrite.

Oh, why is that?

I will not tolerate you or others continuing to spread libel about me with your statements. Your behaviour is exactly why you should not be allowed in #tnp and why I should not be excluded.

If you feel I have libelled you, you are free to take any appropriate action.

The thing is Gov, I'm not a stalker with RL restraining orders. You are.

I'm not banned from any regions. At last count you're banned from... too many to count.

I'm not singled out as someone who the game would be better off without, nor someone who has made others leave the game. You are.

That is why you're banned from #tnp and that is why you should be banned from TNP, and NS as a whole.

 

[Alvino Castillon]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

All four of your points are not reasonable actually.

I am not seeking to regulate the channel #tnp on Esper.net. I am seeking to establish that it is indeed an officially sanctioned channel for the North Pacific community to enjoy itself and chat with one another. This argument has been going on for a long time and at this point, I am very concerned that it will reach a breaking point.

The founder of that channel should not be subjected to the whims of the Regional Government. Wham has the right to do as he pleases with the channel, because he owns it. They shouldn't have to change their way of doing things just because of this proposal.

The point of this legislation is to state that #tnp is the legitimate channel that the regional community often uses in the North Pacific. It is not a matter of regulating #tnp but simply giving it a nod. The regional government shouldn't meddle in the Administration of #tnp because it is privately owned, but stating that its use is condoned isn't the worst thing we have considered.

Govindia, stop trying to victimize yourself. This legislation doesn't even mention you.

 

[St George]

It should mention him, in a clause banning him from every irc channel tnp deems 'official' in the future.

 

[Gaspo]

This is not a stage for these debates; both of you are straying from the topic at hand. Let's talk about this bill, please. Keep your squabbles in the sandbox.

 

[Govindia]

2. Stgeorge being a hypocrite when it comes to civil rights of people he doesn't like. So much for Equality and Fairness.

Show me where I have said I am in favour of total equality and fairness, and you might, if you squint a teeny tiny bit, have a point.

But I've never made a post like that, and do indeed, think you should be excluded from #tnp.

Why? I think we all know why.

Oh, and thank you Flem for posting that. I don't know why you considered it necessary but whatever. In the future though, if you plan on posting anything I've said in #tnp on these forums, I'd appreciate a head's up so, you know, I can defend myself from stalkers calling me a hypocrite.

Oh, why is that?

I will not tolerate you or others continuing to spread libel about me with your statements. Your behaviour is exactly why you should not be allowed in #tnp and why I should not be excluded.

If you feel I have libelled you, you are free to take any appropriate action.

The thing is Gov, I'm not a stalker with RL restraining orders. You are.

I'm not banned from any regions. At last count you're banned from... too many to count.

I'm not singled out as someone who the game would be better off without, nor someone who has made others leave the game. You are.

That is why you're banned from #tnp and that is why you should be banned from TNP, and NS as a whole.

Prove it and stop lying, you are creating libel.

I have had no restraining orders placed against me IRL at all. Show me the documentation. Because it requires a judge's signature.

You're spreading libel. You will stop now. This is a TOS violation.

 

[Govindia]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

All four of your points are not reasonable actually.

I am not seeking to regulate the channel #tnp on Esper.net. I am seeking to establish that it is indeed an officially sanctioned channel for the North Pacific community to enjoy itself and chat with one another. This argument has been going on for a long time and at this point, I am very concerned that it will reach a breaking point.

The founder of that channel should not be subjected to the whims of the Regional Government. Wham has the right to do as he pleases with the channel, because he owns it. They shouldn't have to change their way of doing things just because of this proposal.

The point of this legislation is to state that #tnp is the legitimate channel that the regional community often uses in the North Pacific. It is not a matter of regulating #tnp but simply giving it a nod. The regional government shouldn't meddle in the Administration of #tnp because it is privately owned, but stating that its use is condoned isn't the worst thing we have considered.

Govindia, stop trying to victimize yourself. This legislation doesn't even mention you.

If that channel is to be recognised by TNP law then it must accept full not partial legislative responsibility underneath it.

The four points I brought up are reasonable and logical. Wham is not a member of this region last I checked as his nation wasn't in TNP anymore and he's no longer in the REgional Assembly, so why is a foreigner owning the channel?

This is an issue with me because so far no one else is currently banned from the channel but myself and people are inappropriately wanting to do everything they can to exclude me not only from where regional affairs are discussed but with this region and its IRC channel too.

ANd it seems like you're condoning that behaviour by not supporting the four logical points I made, which were rather reasonable.

 

[Romanoffia]

What we need are competing channels, like they have on TV.

 

[Hileville]

This is an issue with me because so far no one else is currently banned from the channel but myself and people are inappropriately wanting to do everything they can to exclude me not only from where regional affairs are discussed but with this region and its IRC channel too.

That isn't true. Looking at the ban list several other people are also banned from the channel. You are most certainly the most vocal about it though.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

Persecutory delusion.

 

[Alvino Castillon]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

All four of your points are not reasonable actually.

I am not seeking to regulate the channel #tnp on Esper.net. I am seeking to establish that it is indeed an officially sanctioned channel for the North Pacific community to enjoy itself and chat with one another. This argument has been going on for a long time and at this point, I am very concerned that it will reach a breaking point.

The founder of that channel should not be subjected to the whims of the Regional Government. Wham has the right to do as he pleases with the channel, because he owns it. They shouldn't have to change their way of doing things just because of this proposal.

The point of this legislation is to state that #tnp is the legitimate channel that the regional community often uses in the North Pacific. It is not a matter of regulating #tnp but simply giving it a nod. The regional government shouldn't meddle in the Administration of #tnp because it is privately owned, but stating that its use is condoned isn't the worst thing we have considered.

Govindia, stop trying to victimize yourself. This legislation doesn't even mention you.

If that channel is to be recognised by TNP law then it must accept full not partial legislative responsibility underneath it.

No. It is a privately ran chat and we will keep it that way. It is not up to the regional government to decide who gets to run it and I do not seek legislation to forcibly take over someone's channel.

The four points I brought up are reasonable and logical. Wham is not a member of this region last I checked as his nation wasn't in TNP anymore and he's no longer in the REgional Assembly, so why is a foreigner owning the channel?

Your points aren't reasonable. I countered them all at once and your argument is weak overall. Also, no one seems to care that Wham is not in the RA. If enough people cared they would have moved to a new channel that was ran by someone in the RA. There lies the problem... what then happens when they aren't in the RA anymore? Are we supposed to just get up and move every time a "foreigner" runs a channel?

This is an issue with me because so far no one else is currently banned from the channel but myself and people are inappropriately wanting to do everything they can to exclude me not only from where regional affairs are discussed but with this region and its IRC channel too.

Incorrect. That is very bad logic for the following three reasons:
1. Your name isn't even mentioned at all in this proposal and therefore, you should not be taking this as an affront on you;
2. More people have been banned from that channel other than you;
3. Clause 39 of the proposal covers your concerns on regional affairs discussion and ensures your voice will be heard from the forums.

ANd it seems like you're condoning that behaviour by not supporting the four logical points I made, which were rather reasonable.

Disagreeing with you does not mean I condone any behavior. It means I disagree with you and your points.

I personally don't care what gripes there are around the region regarding different members. I try to hold as few as possible. Whatever gripes you have with other people are none of my concern nor the concern of this thread. Please take any matters that have to do with any past conflicts and leave them outside of this thread, because it is not and should not be the focus.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

On second thought...

As Govindia is the most vocal about it, and has continued to declare that his channel is somehow the legitimate channel. The fact clearly is that if people act inappropriately towards others they will be banned from the channel.

This simply makes it clear what channel we deem official, and to finally put an end the stupid debate that #thenorthpacific is the legitimate government channel.

Should we even give those claims the dignity of the legislative response? Personally I'd prefer to leave Gov throwing the toys out of the pram about his channel. This simply is giving more attention to him.

 

[Govindia]

Opposed for the following reasons:

1. While this is a good start, it still does not handle the fact that quite a few of the ops in #tnp are foreigners who are not TNP citizens nor members of its government.

2. Op abuse is not handled here, nor what happens when someone is banned. If it is to be legislated it must also be susceptible to the criminal code. That is, when people do something wrong on the IRC channel, they must be punished through the court system here, and bans can only be handed down as a sentence via the court system, not otherwise.

3. If this legislation goes forward, anyone who's been banned from the channel prior to this law, as ex post facto laws and bills of attainder are forbidden under TNP's laws and Constitution, must be given a clean slate and allowed back in.

4. Ops must be members of TNP's government or Admin/ Mod team, and not anyone else from any other region. Regular citizens, RA members and what not are voiced, others are not.

I believe these four points are reasonable and logical concerns and if they are addressed adequately in revisions of this legislation, then I will reconsider my opposition.

All four of your points are not reasonable actually.

I am not seeking to regulate the channel #tnp on Esper.net. I am seeking to establish that it is indeed an officially sanctioned channel for the North Pacific community to enjoy itself and chat with one another. This argument has been going on for a long time and at this point, I am very concerned that it will reach a breaking point.

The founder of that channel should not be subjected to the whims of the Regional Government. Wham has the right to do as he pleases with the channel, because he owns it. They shouldn't have to change their way of doing things just because of this proposal.

The point of this legislation is to state that #tnp is the legitimate channel that the regional community often uses in the North Pacific. It is not a matter of regulating #tnp but simply giving it a nod. The regional government shouldn't meddle in the Administration of #tnp because it is privately owned, but stating that its use is condoned isn't the worst thing we have considered.

Govindia, stop trying to victimize yourself. This legislation doesn't even mention you.

If that channel is to be recognised by TNP law then it must accept full not partial legislative responsibility underneath it.

No. It is a privately ran chat and we will keep it that way. It is not up to the regional government to decide who gets to run it and I do not seek legislation to forcibly take over someone's channel.

The four points I brought up are reasonable and logical. Wham is not a member of this region last I checked as his nation wasn't in TNP anymore and he's no longer in the REgional Assembly, so why is a foreigner owning the channel?

Your points aren't reasonable. I countered them all at once and your argument is weak overall. Also, no one seems to care that Wham is not in the RA. If enough people cared they would have moved to a new channel that was ran by someone in the RA. There lies the problem... what then happens when they aren't in the RA anymore? Are we supposed to just get up and move every time a "foreigner" runs a channel?

This is an issue with me because so far no one else is currently banned from the channel but myself and people are inappropriately wanting to do everything they can to exclude me not only from where regional affairs are discussed but with this region and its IRC channel too.

Incorrect. That is very bad logic for the following three reasons:
1. Your name isn't even mentioned at all in this proposal and therefore, you should not be taking this as an affront on you;
2. More people have been banned from that channel other than you;
3. Clause 39 of the proposal covers your concerns on regional affairs discussion and ensures your voice will be heard from the forums.

ANd it seems like you're condoning that behaviour by not supporting the four logical points I made, which were rather reasonable.

Disagreeing with you does not mean I condone any behavior. It means I disagree with you and your points.

I personally don't care what gripes there are around the region regarding different members. I try to hold as few as possible. Whatever gripes you have with other people are none of my concern nor the concern of this thread. Please take any matters that have to do with any past conflicts and leave them outside of this thread, because it is not and should not be the focus.

Please provide a list of all who are currently banned from #tnp and their reasons for being banned, besides myself.

There is still no provision here for dealing with op abuse.

If it's an official channel of the region, it's no longer a private channel, therefore it is under TNP laws as this would make it and therefore susceptible to the Legal Code and Constitution. Which means people cannot be banned from the channel without a legitimate trial.

It is legitimate to call for a blank slate unbanning on all prior people who were banned from #tnp prior to this law made in accordance with the Constitution's rules about ex post facto laws and bills of attainder.

And what I'm saying is that foreigners shouldn't run the channel, only TNP natives. That means ownership should be transferred to a TNP citizen and RA member instead of a non citizen and non-RA member.

And no, I'm not in a state of delusion BW. The way mcmasterdonia, Eluvatar and others have repeatedly singled me out at times has been unjust and inappropriate and tantamount to cyber-bullying.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Govindia, as you well know, I have shown a lot of patience towards you, as have other people. I am just tired of your constant sense of entitlement, your constant need to harass people for answers they cannot give you, and your argumentative nature.

I have never once singled you out or cyber bullied you. You on the other hand have harassed me on IRC on many occasions despite repeated requests to stop.

Eluvatar has not done so either. Simply because we do not use your channel for cabinet meetings, and you were not awarded government positions in our governments, does not equal cyber bullying.

Do not accuse me of that.

 

[Govindia]

Govindia, as you well know, I have shown a lot of patience towards you, as have other people. I am just tired of your constant sense of entitlement, your constant need to harass people for answers they cannot give you, and your argumentative nature.

I have never once singled you out or cyber bullied you. You on the other hand have harassed me on IRC on many occasions despite repeated requests to stop.

Eluvatar has not done so either. Simply because we do not use your channel for cabinet meetings, and you were not awarded government positions in our governments, does not equal cyber bullying.

Do not accuse me of that.

This is beyond the IRC channel issue I had spoken to you. Way beyond that. I've spoken to you before about this even a long time ago, before you were even running for Vice Delegate.

I will explain a bit more in detail later, I'm still at work.

 

[DRUK]

Govindia,

At this stage of the game, where you have been acknowledged as a member of TNP, who constantly harasses other TNP members and causes disturbances, I think it is best for you to avoid further arguments, conflicts, and actions, which clearly violate the TNP Constitution, Bill of Rights, and its Legal Code.

You may think the entire situation, related to the emotions, actions, and suggestions of the majority of the TNP members, is entirely unfair towards you; however, we were also disturbed by your actions and it seems that many people here are becoming tired of it.

I believe it is time for you to stop, and take a break, so that maximum peace can be accomplished within the region. Thank you.

 

[Kiwi]

I would consider supporting a bill that codified the current rules but I definitely don't support any changes.

It's good that it is kept separate.

I also do not consider it appropriate to lift bans placed reasonably by the current channel operators. There is no reason to do so nor should anyone challenge the decisions they have made. Even if I do not personally agree with who all of the current channel operators are.

 

[Crushing Our Enemies]

I think that from a legal standpoint, if any IRC channel were deemed to be an official government channel, then the bill of rights, constitution, and legal code would have to be enforced there, just like in other official government channels (e.g. this forum.)

I don't really see a need for this legislation. IRC exists to facilitate chat between members of the region. It's clearly doing that, and the RA shouldn't be inserting its collective nose where it's not needed. The last thing this region needs is a rash of civil and criminal complaints over something an OP did on IRC.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[Thomas Insaniac]

I think Crushing Our Enemies pretty much summed up my view on this entire subject.

#tnp has worked fine without the RA meddling in it, and their is no reason (currently) to change the state of things. Nothing in the system is broken to an extent that a fix needs to happen and I think we should just let it be.

 

[Flemingovia]

I think that from a legal standpoint, if any IRC channel were deemed to be an official government channel, then the bill of rights, constitution, and legal code would have to be enforced there, just like in other official government channels (e.g. this forum.)

I don't really see a need for this legislation. IRC exists to facilitate chat between members of the region. It's clearly doing that, and the RA shouldn't be inserting its collective nose where it's not needed. The last thing this region needs is a rash of civil and criminal complaints over something an OP did on IRC.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Quoted for Truth

 

[Kingborough]

And what I'm saying is that foreigners shouldn't run the channel, only TNP natives. That means ownership should be transferred to a TNP citizen and RA member instead of a non citizen and non-RA member.

And no, I'm not in a state of delusion BW. The way mcmasterdonia, Eluvatar and others have repeatedly singled me out at times has been unjust and inappropriate and tantamount to cyber-bullying.

Actually, McM has been better to you than most people in this region so I don't know why you are singling him out. Your actions are the ones more tantamount to cyber-bullying than anyone elses.

Ringing people IRL, harassing members of the government and admin team if they don't give you a position, stealing and hawking IRC channels, generally being argumentative and endlessly challenging everyone and anyone who doesn't agree with you as 'illegitimate'.