- TNP Nation
- Zyvetskistaahn
- Discord
- Zyvet#9958
This thread is to record the deliberations of the Court in relation to the request for review relating to the banning of the nation "Finnish Ougyza" for spamming the RMB with what seem to be recruitment messages of a sort. The thread for this request can be found here.
I have rejected the request, as I am of the view that Mall lacks standing and that the request deviated from the template mandated by the rules. Discussion prior to that rejection can be seen below.
I have rejected the request, as I am of the view that Mall lacks standing and that the request deviated from the template mandated by the rules. Discussion prior to that rejection can be seen below.
December 13, 2017
[10:08 PM] Zyvet: There appears to be another request for review
[10:08 PM] Scorch: Yep
[10:09 PM] Scorch: You going to accept it?
[10:13 PM] Zyvet: I'm looking at it now
[10:13 PM] Zyvet: I don't think so
[10:14 PM] Zyvet: I don't see that Mall has standing to request the review of the ejection of another nation, it is for that nation to do so
[10:15 PM] Zyvet: Am I looking at the correct ruling? The ruling Mall refers to doesn't seem to mention RMB recruitment?
[10:16 PM] Zyvet: Ah, I'm blind and there are two rulings referred to
[10:18 PM] Zyvet: Though the second also seems to omit mention of RMB recruitment?
[10:18 PM] Zyvet: But I am actually blinder still because the first ruling does mention it
[10:24 PM] Zyvet: In any event, I am inclined to reject the request because: 1) Mall does not have standing to request a review of the violation of the rights of another, if a nation's rights are violated it is for that nation or the Attorney General to seek vindication; 2) Mall's point on free speech is too remote to give rise to a clear connection, were we to accept his rationale there is no reason why a nation could not simply say that they intend to breach a given law and thereby acquire standing; 3) the previous ruling he refers to seems to clearly exclude recruiters from BoR protections, it is plainly stated and it seems to me to be part of the ratio and not merely dicta
[10:26 PM] Scorch: I am also for rejection.
[10:47 PM] Zyvet: Also, there is a deviation from the r4r template, in that the template does not include a section on the remedy sought
December 14, 2017
[12:48 AM] Zyvet: Well, I'm going to sleep shortly. I'll reject the review tomorrow unless you ( @Bootsie ) take the other view and accept it before then
[12:57 AM] Bootsie: I agree with the rejection.
[10:08 PM] Zyvet: There appears to be another request for review
[10:08 PM] Scorch: Yep
[10:09 PM] Scorch: You going to accept it?
[10:13 PM] Zyvet: I'm looking at it now
[10:13 PM] Zyvet: I don't think so
[10:14 PM] Zyvet: I don't see that Mall has standing to request the review of the ejection of another nation, it is for that nation to do so
[10:15 PM] Zyvet: Am I looking at the correct ruling? The ruling Mall refers to doesn't seem to mention RMB recruitment?
[10:16 PM] Zyvet: Ah, I'm blind and there are two rulings referred to
[10:18 PM] Zyvet: Though the second also seems to omit mention of RMB recruitment?
[10:18 PM] Zyvet: But I am actually blinder still because the first ruling does mention it
[10:24 PM] Zyvet: In any event, I am inclined to reject the request because: 1) Mall does not have standing to request a review of the violation of the rights of another, if a nation's rights are violated it is for that nation or the Attorney General to seek vindication; 2) Mall's point on free speech is too remote to give rise to a clear connection, were we to accept his rationale there is no reason why a nation could not simply say that they intend to breach a given law and thereby acquire standing; 3) the previous ruling he refers to seems to clearly exclude recruiters from BoR protections, it is plainly stated and it seems to me to be part of the ratio and not merely dicta
[10:26 PM] Scorch: I am also for rejection.
[10:47 PM] Zyvet: Also, there is a deviation from the r4r template, in that the template does not include a section on the remedy sought
December 14, 2017
[12:48 AM] Zyvet: Well, I'm going to sleep shortly. I'll reject the review tomorrow unless you ( @Bootsie ) take the other view and accept it before then
[12:57 AM] Bootsie: I agree with the rejection.