Second IRC Officializing Act

Govindia:

Blue Wolf II:

Govindia:

Then I'd like to see you find a better way to combat op abuse, as op abuse and misuse was the reason I got banned from IRC.

Click to expand...

Oh really? I was not around in person when the ban was instituted, you see, but I am interested to hear how it occurred, Gov.

What OP abuses occurred? Why do you feel they are abuses? Who committed them and, in your opinion, why?

Perhaps answering these questions will help us in understanding why you were banned, Gov, and help construct a better way of combating abuse that we all agree with.

Click to expand...

Are you actually asking me in a serious manner or are you trying to mock / patronise me ?

Click to expand...

I'm being completely serious.

Gov, I think you'd like a review of your ban and are trying to make a law that would overturn your ban or give you an opportunity to present your case to the courts.

I think you have a bias in this particular issue because you are banned. I'd suggest going to the mods about it. Look, i can understand your feelings of being unjustly banned with no recourse -- i'm banned from TSP forums going on 7 years this February. I get it. At the end of the day though, the owners of the channel, forum, etc. make decisions.

By and large most people here want to keep #tnp separate from TNP government. I do too. My reasoning is that i have been in enough convos in #tnp that were so unrelated to the game that it doesnt make sense to force #tnp into TNPs jurisdiction, imo.

I motion to table the proposal.

I see no second to the original proposal, and i see a motion to table.

However, i do not wish to see the motion tabled if there is still life in it. IRO, the ball is in your court: either find a second to the motion, or withdraw it.

I motion to ignore the motion to table and to ignore all motions to table any discussion ever.

Jamie:

I motion to table the proposal.

Click to expand...

Last I checked, we still don't have anything that allows us to motion to table anything...

And never should.

Way too easy for two people to shut something down. But let's not get off topic.

I motion to table the lack of an ability to motion to table.

I also find this entire proposal to be useless. If #tnp became grounded in TNP law, then I have a sneaking suspicion that its regulars would simply move to a different channel, and we'd be having this same argument in a few months. Leave IRC out of TNP jurisdiction, let people chat where they want without fear of government intervention.

The whole problem has to do with conducting official government business on IRC channels and the fact that there's no easy way of retrieving IRC logs that would document such business.

It creates all sorts of problems for forum administration here, as a for instance, because if something is announced there that requires something to be done here, we have no way of seeing it or getting verification that such action was announced or discussed.

What is needed is a limited law with respect to governmental activity being done on IRC which leads to actions being needed to be done on the forums, whether by the forum moderation and administration team or by government officials. Same thing with respect to the use of IRC logs as records or evidence of such activity.

These are concerns that would need to be addressed regardless of what IRC channel is used, who participates in the discussion, or when it takes place.

I have no issue with a designation and construction of a wall of separation of authority being added to the constitution as currently exists with the forums, if that is thought to be needed, but the other points I listed above are the topics that really need to be addressed.