TNP v. Empire of Narnia discussion

Gaspo

Gaspo

TNPer
He's entered a guilty plea, which I have accepted. PunkD recommends a 30-day forum ban; the law authorizes us to do anything we want, basically. We can have him ejected and banned ingame, restrict his rights on the forums and in the region as much as we want, and/or have him forum-banned.

I do think the prosecutor's office made a mistake here. Two separate bad acts were committed, according to the chatlog submitted HERE; they could have charged with two counts. One for phishing the password, and one for getting the forum deleted.

I can't find much evidence of Narnia actually exercising his rights as an RA member, and I don't know how active he is as an NPA soldier. He shows no contrition for his actions, though, and seems to go out of his way to seek punishment and draw attention to his bad actions. I'm not inclined to be lenient; I'd personally combine the 30-day forum ban with a 60-day restriction on participation in government in any form, through RA membership, military service, or anything else. By wearing the uniform, so to speak, and exercising the rights of an RA member, we effectively condone and slap on the wrist, someone who has clearly, willfully, and flagrantly broken our laws. It devalues the law, and the people who obey that law, to punish him with a slap on the wrist. He'll be totally gone for 30d (forum ban), and will have another 30d to try to learn how to behave in our community and respect our laws.

Lastly, I would see if we can order him to make a formal apology to the region in question. That just seems right.

tl;dr 30d forum ban, 60d removal from RA/military/everything, and reset of any military rank, and a formal apology, ingame, to the affected region. Thoughts?
 
As per the legal code we are allowed to do the following:

5. Crashing, Phishing, or Spamming may be punished by ejection and banning, the removal of any and all basic rights for whatever duration the Court sees fit, and/or banning by forum administration.
Click to expand...

I would say a 45 day forum ban would be more sufficient for banning. As far as position block I would say a 3 month ban from all elected offices and allow them to return to the RA and Army upon completion of the forum ban.
 
I'm sick of Narnia. I don't support the charges in question - reporting a forum for ToS violations doesn't equal crashing - but in this case, considering his guilty plea and behavior within the court I don't give a damn.

Permanent ban.
 
Thing about the crashing, is if you look at the log, he created the TOS violation first, then reported them for it. So there was no violation until he created it. That's what makes it malicious, to me.
 
Ah I misread - my apologies. I'm not inclined to be tolerant, either, but we do have a first offender here. I'll think about it some more and post later.
 
So the sense is that we should go more harsh than I had intended. So let's do that. I get the sense Bel wants a bit more than you or I are initially interested in assigning; how would we all feel about 60d forum ban with one additional month of RA suspension, running concurrent with 6 month ban from elected or appointed offices.
 
Gaspo:
So the sense is that we should go more harsh than I had intended. So let's do that. I get the sense Bel wants a bit more than you or I are initially interested in assigning; how would we all feel about 60d forum ban with one additional month of RA suspension, running concurrent with 6 month ban from elected or appointed offices.
Click to expand...
I would support this. I wouldn't be opposed to discussing possible perma ban either.
 
My only issue with perma bans is that this is only the second time this Court has ever decided punishment - if we agree we're willing to go that far for first offences, it sets challenging precedent. Given how tolerant the region is of people like Gov, I get the feeling TNP favors rehabilitation more than capital punishment (i.e. banning). If we permaban for first offense of crashing, what's to say we don't permaban for first offense of many other things, or level massive year-long bans, or things like that. I mean, it is a game, and we do have to find a balance in determining appropriate punishment. For a first offense, I don't think I'd be comfortable with anything more than 6 months - I could go up from what I suggested if Bel feels really strongly about it.
 
No, in retrospect I was being far too harsh. He's annoyed me with his conduct in court, and I need to separate that from the actual charges. I'm fine with Gaspo's proposal.
 
Got it. I will draft the notice immediately, and file an Admin Request to execute the punishment.
 
I posted our verdict. Punkd immediately got on and got all outraged, accusing us of ignoring his recommendation and then suggesting that we may have ignored a plea deal. The facts I can discern from IRC are as follows: punkd appears to think we're obligated to follow his recommendations (we're not), he thinks he made a recommendation (his forum post says "in my opinion", so I didn't take it as such), and he insinuated in his post in his office, that we sentenced based on narnia's courtroom conduct rather than on the case at hand.

As to the plea deal, they offered a 30d forum ban to Narnia, who did not respond one way or another to it. PunkD didn't contact the actual prosecutor on the case before making his post, and no mention of a plea deal being agreed to was made in the case. PunkD believes we sentenced too harshy considering the facts; I pointed out that we're not really allowed to consider the facts as mitigating factors given that the merits of the case were never heard. He didn't seem to grasp that; oh well.

I argued with him a bit about it, and he finally announced something about how this was a shameful version of justice, blah blah blah. I don't mean any of this as a complaint about PunkD; I merely record it here so we're all on the same page about the context of PunkD's comment in his office, which I'm sure we'll all read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top