Previously, Local Councillor Concrete Slab has had corrupt actions. While browsing through my filesystem earlier today, I found a screenshot of more corrupt actions by Concrete Slab, and I also have additional things I would like to note along with this, as well as another moment I recalled from memory.
The screenshot I had found was of this post being suppressed by Concrete Slab. He makes a claim in a following post claiming the reason for it being my usage of the term "damn". However, this is blatantly untrue because Concrete Slab himself uses the word "damn" a lot. Therefore, I believe this to be corruption and breaking the following laws, due to it being suppression of critical speech:

(7) Corruption shall be defined as the misuse of public office for private or personal advantage.
...
(3) If found guilty of any other crime listed above, the Judiciary will determine a sentence. The sentence must be proportionate to the offense.

I had additionally recalled another example of the same laws being violated in the same way. The context of the situation is Concrete Slab suppressing appropriate posts that contain the word "sex". This was posted by Zinaland as a post with an opinion against Concrete Slab. However, it was suppressed, which violates the same aforementioned laws in the same aforementioned way.
Concrete Slab is also, inarguably, guilty of the following:

(13) Conduct violations shall be defined as breaking in-game NationStates rules.
...
(2) Conduct violations are punishable by immediate ejection and banishment from the region, albeit punished parties may appeal this decision to the High Court. In most cases, nations that appeal the decision and apologize should expect to have their ban lifted.

The first example of this is in this post, which is blatant sexual roleplay because of the context. However, this was never suppressed and was later warned by TSSS. Despite the warning, Concrete Slab proceeded to sexually roleplay, starting on this RMB page. This is blatantly breaking NationStates rules, as it was suppressed by the NationStates Moderators.

how am i even still a legislator at this point...?

(This post was last modified: 03-10-2019, 02:50 PM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

This is obviously just an attempt to deter me from running from LC. If the events listed had happened recently, I would understand. However, many of these events NHC is referring to happened months ago. I have already been reprimanded by the NS moderators and convicted by this esteemed body once. 

NHC is not doing this for "justice". According to this post, NHC was just bored and wanted something to do. He even took the name of the case off an NPO MEMES COMPILATION. What better than to try and knock out one of his main forms of competition in the upcoming Local Council election. 

I've learned my lesson. I've been convicted. The evidence is outdated and shoddy. I condemn NHC for his actions.

Concrete Slab
Coral Guard Member
5x Local Councillor 
TSP Legislator and Citizen
Ambassador to the League 
Author of GAR #471, #479, and SCR #271
Co-author of SCR #300
Founded 1/25/18

(This post was last modified: 02-01-2019, 11:27 PM by Concrete Slab.)

Reply

This is obviously just an attempt to deter me from running from LC. If this had happened recently, I would understand. However, many of these events NHC is referring to happened months ago. I have already been reprimanded by the NS moderators and convicted by this esteemed body once. 

NHC is not doing this for "justice". According to this post, NHC was just bored and wanted something to do. What better than to try and knock out one of his main forms of competition in the upcoming Local Council election. 

I've learned my lesson. I've been convicted. The evidence is outdated and shoddy. I condemn NHC for his actions.

I think whether or not NHC is being vindictive is a bit irrelevant, but he had said he wanted to initiate these charges before then here And here; still, I think we should be looking at the content of his argument not the presentation (maybe, I’m not really familiar with the laws here).

I do want to note: even though this event happened after the original corruption case was over, CS was unaware that he had been warned:
discussion

(This post was last modified: 02-01-2019, 11:59 PM by Lily Pad.)

Reply

Indictment

Whereas New Haudenosaunee Confederacy has requested this Court to indict Concrete Slab through the following request:

I believe this to be corruption and breaking the laws, due to it being suppression of critical speech.

Whereas this Court is empowered by Article V, Section 1 of the Judicial Act to indict individuals when it finds probable cause that they may have committed a crime, as codified in the Criminal Code.

It is resolved with respect to this Criminal Complaint as follows:

1. The Court finds probable cause that Concrete Slab may have engaged in Corruption, a crime codified under Article I, Section 7 of the Criminal Code.
   
2. This case shall be assigned the case number HCCC1901 and be referred to in full as New Haudenosaunee Confederacy v. Concrete Slab.
   
3. Concrete Slab shall be contacted through telegram and given until 17 February 2019 to respond to the charge levied against them.
   
4. The Court invites all able and willing members to submit any evidence or testimony relevant to this criminal case, no later than 17 February 2019.
   
5. The Court reserves the right to consult with, and request evidence and private testimonies from, other government institutions and individuals, for the purposes of research and clarification of context.
   
6. The Court, in compliance with the Charter and the Judicial Act, retains the sole right to issue a verdict on this Criminal Case.
   

It is so ordered.

Kris Kringle
Chief Justice

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Reply

Previously, Local Councillor Concrete Slab has had corrupt actions. While browsing through my filesystem earlier today, I found a screenshot of more corrupt actions by Concrete Slab, and I also have additional things I would like to note along with this, as well as another moment I recalled from memory.
The screenshot I had found was of this post being suppressed by Concrete Slab. He makes a claim in a following post claiming the reason for it being my usage of the term "damn". However, this is blatantly untrue because Concrete Slab himself uses the word "damn" a lot. Therefore, I believe this to be corruption and breaking the following laws, due to it being suppression of critical speech:

(7) Corruption shall be defined as the misuse of public office for private or personal advantage.
...
(3) If found guilty of any other crime listed above, the Judiciary will determine a sentence. The sentence must be proportionate to the offense.

I had additionally recalled another example of the same laws being violated in the same way. The context of the situation is Concrete Slab suppressing appropriate posts that contain the word "sex". This was posted by Zinaland as a post with an opinion against Concrete Slab. However, it was suppressed, which violates the same aforementioned laws in the same aforementioned way.
Concrete Slab is also, inarguably, guilty of the following:

(13) Conduct violations shall be defined as breaking in-game NationStates rules.
...
(2) Conduct violations are punishable by immediate ejection and banishment from the region, albeit punished parties may appeal this decision to the High Court. In most cases, nations that appeal the decision and apologize should expect to have their ban lifted.

The first example of this is in this post, which is blatant sexual roleplay because of the context. However, this was never suppressed and was later warned by TSSS. Despite the warning, Concrete Slab proceeded to sexually roleplay, starting on this RMB page. This is blatantly breaking NationStates rules, as it was suppressed by the NationStates Moderators.  

To the charge of suppressing damn, I apologize. I was most likely in a foul mood based on the basis of the conversation, and when I saw the curse word, I suppressed it. As all can see, this post has been unsuppressed. I do not think I was suppressing "critical speech" however. Clause IX of the RMB Rules and Etiquette states no "swearing or harmful messages..." It was in accordance with these rules I suppressed the post due to the "harmful message of NHC not caring how he treated me. The fact of me using the word "damn" makes me more of a hypocrite than corrupt. 

On the charge of suppressing the sexual roleplay: If you take a look at the posts he is referencing, you will see the sexual roleplay the mods suppressed happend long before I was inaugurated as Local Councillor. The reason I suppressed the usage of the word "sex" was because I was still sensitive about my mistake and wanted to stop others from following in my footsteps. At the time, I thought I was doing the correct thing to preserve the regional message board.

Thank you for your time justices.

Concrete Slab
Coral Guard Member
5x Local Councillor 
TSP Legislator and Citizen
Ambassador to the League 
Author of GAR #471, #479, and SCR #271
Co-author of SCR #300
Founded 1/25/18

(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 10:19 AM by Concrete Slab.)

Reply

As all can see, this post has been unsuppressed.

The post has been unsuppressed seemingly for no other reason than this criminal complaint. I have a screenshot of the post being suppressed, which can be viewed here. The screenshot was taken on the 1st of February, according to the information in the file, however I can't really prove that it says that, except with the information in the actual photo. This screenshot was taken 26 days after the message was lodged on the RMB. As of now, the post was lodged 37 days ago, and with some basic math (37-26=11) it would make sense that this screenshot was taken on the 2nd of February (despite what I had said before), as 11 days ago was the 2nd of February, a day after this complaint was posted.

It was in accordance with these rules I suppressed the post due to the "harmful message of NHC not caring how he treated me.

That was not your claim of why you had suppressed it. Your claim was that it was due to usage of the term "damn", as shown in the linked post. However, this claim also doesn't work, because I did not say that I don't care about how I treat you. You are basically just straight-up lying.

On the charge of suppressing the sexual roleplay: If you take a look at the posts he is referencing, you will see the sexual roleplay the mods suppressed happend long before I was inaugurated as Local Councillor.

And that matters because...? (*happened btw)
EDIT: You not being an LC doesn't make you immune to getting criminal complaints against you. I really should've said this more clearly.

The reason I suppressed the usage of the word "sex" was because I was still sensitive about my mistake and wanted to stop others from following in my footsteps. At the time, I thought I was doing the correct thing to preserve the regional message board.

Yes, I can at least understand that, but that ALSO doesn't matter. You still suppressed critical speech.

how am i even still a legislator at this point...?

(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 04:47 PM by New Haudenosaunee Confederacy.)

Reply

The post has been unsuppressed seemingly for no other reason than this criminal complaint. I have a screenshot of the post being suppressed, which can be viewed here. The screenshot was taken on the 1st of February, according to the information in the file, however I can't really prove that it says that, except with the information in the actual photo. This screenshot was taken 26 days after the message was lodged on the RMB. As of now, the post was lodged 37 days ago, and with some basic math (37-26=11) it would make sense that this screenshot was taken on the 2nd of February (despite what I had said before), as 11 days ago was the 2nd of February, a day after this complaint was posted.

The reason I just unsuppressed the post was because your case reminded me of said post and I realized it no longer had to be suppressed. 

That was not your claim of why you had suppressed it. Your claim was that it was due to usage of the term "damn", as shown in the linked post. However, this claim also doesn't work, because I did not say that I don't care about how I treat you. You are basically just straight-up lying.

I am not "straight-up lying" as you so brashly put it. I suppressed the post for both those reasons, not just because of the usage of "damn". And no matter what you said, I still interpreted the message as harmful and suppressed it, but was not going to say "NHC hurt my feelings" on the rmb.

And that matters because...? (*happened btw)
EDIT: You not being an LC doesn't make you immune to getting criminal complaints against you. I really should've said this more clearly.

Where did I say that I thought this? I only mentioned it was before my time as Local Councillor to show it was a long time ago.

Yes, I can at least understand that, but that ALSO doesn't matter. You still suppressed critical speech.

This does ALSO matter because the "critical speech" had the usage of phrases I deemed inappropriate, and thus suppressed.

Concrete Slab
Coral Guard Member
5x Local Councillor 
TSP Legislator and Citizen
Ambassador to the League 
Author of GAR #471, #479, and SCR #271
Co-author of SCR #300
Founded 1/25/18

Reply

The reason I just unsuppressed the post was because your case reminded me of said post and I realized it no longer had to be suppressed. 

You're basically saying exactly what I just said: You unsuppressed it because it was used in this court case.

I am not "straight-up lying" as you so brashly put it. I suppressed the post for both those reasons, not just because of the usage of "damn". And no matter what you said, I still interpreted the message as harmful and suppressed it, but was not going to say "NHC hurt my feelings" on the rmb.

How is that harmful? How does that hurt your feelings? Do you even know what post I'm referencing?

This does ALSO matter because the "critical speech" had the usage of phrases I deemed inappropriate, and thus suppressed.

I highly doubt that it was because of the term sex, because by that same logic you would've suppressed many of the posts containing the term "sex" surrounding that critical speech from Zinaland, some of which are even yours. This post by Zess has a quote of you using a form of the word "sex", however you had edited it 8 hours ago. The post is linked here, as well as this post (and don't even think about editing that out too, I'm screenshotting everything). That is however only one example, many posted before the previously linked post of Zinaland's critical speech contain the word "sex".
As Si-topia mentions in the midst of the mess being discussed, the entire LC did not agree to suppress the word "sex", as somewhat explained in the RMB etiquette dispatch (hopefully) agreed upon by the LC:

IX. No Inappropriate Things
Excessive swearing, harmful messages, sexual references, etc. will be suppressed on sight, and the moderators could even get involved.
Keep it up, and you will be booted from the region.

It does say no sexual references, but all of the posts suppressed, including the critical speech and the spark of this posted by Zess originally containing the word "sex", don't actually reference sex, as Zess was referencing a band and as Zinaland was using the term being suppressed as a point in their argument against Slab. If the moderation policy in the RMB etiquette dispatch was agreed upon by the present LC, then this does not exactly comply with the charter:

(3) The Local Council may not be denied the authority to run regional polls, create and pin Dispatches, and to suppress messages on the Regional Message Board according to a standard moderation policy. However, it may not alter the regional flags or tags, and may not send out mass telegrams, without the approval of the Delegate.

how am i even still a legislator at this point...?

(This post was last modified: 02-13-2019, 07:03 PM by New Haudenosaunee Confederacy.)

Reply

I urge the court to narrowly consider if the initial suppression raised in this complaint was justified within the RMB guidelines posted on the WFE.  The suppression or non-suppression of posts prior to that date are not relevant, especially if the complainant did not feel they merited introduction in the prior complaint to this court, and has posted on the RMB that this latest complaint was made out of boredom.

We elect a LC use their judgement to handle RMB moderation, in accordance with the rules they independently develop and pin to the WFE.  This consideration of suppressed posts prior to 41 days ago (when the RMB guidelines were last updated), and prior to the last criminal complaint that was brought against this local councilor should not be considered as part of this case. 

The decision to suppress a post should not require a meeting of all three LC members, followed by the approval of a delegate and reference to the court:  the suppression power needs to be allowed to be used by the people the region elects to use their judgement at the time and in that moment.   Suppression of posts is the very mildest form of moderation.  Making resident click a "show" button to see what has been posted is not really such an onerous restriction of free speech that it merits high court cases every time it is used.

---

Legislator | Local Councilor | Aspiring TSP Curmudgeon
Messages archived by the Ministry Of the Regal Executive - Bureaucratic Services

---

(This post was last modified: 02-18-2019, 01:50 PM by Volaworand.)

Reply

It is the 18th of February, Voly...

The Court invites all able and willing members to submit any evidence or testimony relevant to this criminal case, no later than 17 February 2019.

how am i even still a legislator at this point...?

(This post was last modified: 02-18-2019, 02:30 PM by New Haudenosaunee Confederacy.)

Reply