Wow. This one is giving me a headache... did I miss Unibot having a falling out with the admin team or something?!?
So, in order:
Q1: If the regional forum became unavailable to reach at thesouthpacific.x10.mx/index.php would the Cabinet be authorized to establish a replacement Regional Forum?
As Farengeto says Article 10(2) covers that.
If it is
permanently unavailable the Cabinet is authorised to create a new forum. I'm not convinced this is a legal question so much as a case of Unibot not reading the Charter properly. Interesting aside, there is no definition of what 'permanent' constitutes in the Charter.
Q2: Are the administrators banned from performing maintenance-related actions which may result in The South Pacific no longer being available at thesouthpacific.x10.mx/index.php?
Article 10(4) states the forum is administered by the admin team. It's not defined anywhere what exactly 'administration' constitutes but as it is clearly separated from moderation. I would have thought that this would be covered by the Administrative Procedures and Moderation Policies required by the Charter but having read them all the administration policy covers in the administration of the moderation. I'd personally have liked to have seen some policy relating to the actual technical administration side of the forums but that's not for a legal question. Maybe Unibot would like to propose something to the Assembly?
Q3: Can severe, although temporary down-times which prevent the use of the forum constitute "permanently unavailable"? In the sense, especially, that the forum is permanently unavailable at times.
A quick search of the Oxford Dictionary tells me that permanent means: "Lasting or intended to last or remain unchanged indefinitely". Therefore temporary isn't permanent.
Q4: Must the entire forum be "permanently unavailable," or could simply areas or significant features be permanently unavailable? For example, parts of the Admin CP are now "permanently unavailable". It appears to me as though the law is ambiguous whether access to the entire forum need be permanently unavailable for Section 2 to apply.
The Charter clearly refers to the Regional Forum, not parts of the Forum. The law isn't ambiguous on this one at all.
Q6: In relation to Section 3; does the "creation of a new Regional Forum" also include the creation of a new address for the forum? That is to say, a new regional address can only be created by the Assembly? An alternative interpretation here might suggest that Article 1 is totally descriptive, not normative and admins still have the right to change the address of the forum when maintenance is required.
That's not a legal question surely?
I see no benefit in hearing this legal question. Move to dismiss all questions (with explanations).
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Former Offices