Users browsing this thread:

Volaworand · 03-07-2019, 01:10 PM

In March 2019 the New Local Council of Concrete Slab, Auphelia and Myself (Volaworand) took office. We learned that after the last local council took over a month to post their new RMB guidelines we needed to promptly develop and post our own RMB moderation guidelines.

After a day of discussion we agreed on some changes to the Guidelines and posted them.

These include a one month test of
1) loosening of the rules on mild profanity (after the last councils High Court case over the legality of the word "Damn"),
2) an acknowledgement of the RMB's trend towards role play, by allowing role play within reason in the RMB.

We tightened the section on double posting reaffirming that it would again be subject to suppression, and included language allowing each Council discretion implementing the return of this policy. And we added a section inviting people to use in game telegrams to request or appeal the suppression of a post to any Local Councilor.

The current policy can be found here: https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1177407
For reference, previous two local Council's Guidelines can be found here (hosted by Aidenfieeld) and here (hosted by Midand).

We are planning on reviewing these guidelines in one months time, and are open to feedback on the changes. What is working and what's not, and what would your preferences be for policies governing the the RMB?

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

**Rebeltopia** · 03-07-2019, 01:14 PM

My feedback would be to actually codify the rules, so they dont change with every new LC term...

"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011

One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium

POSITIONS! POSITIONS, EVERYONE!!

Quotes

Poppy · 03-07-2019, 09:45 PM

(03-07-2019, 01:14 PM)Rebeltopia Wrote: My feedback would be to actually codify the rules, so they dont change with every new LC term...

I would agree to a certain extent but I think it's also important to let rules change with time, I do, however, think an argument could be made for the rules being drawn up in a grand charter which would have certain specifics voted on by wa members in polls then have the rules change in a similar style with amendments being added like they are here but more gameside focused, maybe with a local having to propose a amendment to the rules and then other locals having to second, third, etc leading to a wa vote on the matter or something like that. The problem I see with this is random locals who are salty just constantly proposing amendments but this could perhaps be helped by maybe one of the lcs having to second the amendment instead of just locals? Though that could stray into the problem of lcs not seconding amendments that a vast majority of the population want just because they don't want to but theoretically they would be able to exercise discretion on what is a serious amendment or not on this? Then again, I'm always the one arguing for restricting too much allotment of lc discretion so I'm not sure on how exactly this would work, maybe we should just let the locals be the ones who would second the amendments and such and let democracy take its place with the lcs as the ultimate enforcers but I think something similar to a amendment system of some type would be necessary if we were to draw up a codified law.

Nation: 073 039 109 032 080 111 112 112 121
I'm more active gameside than here but either place I'd love to talk ^-^

**Rebeltopia** · 03-08-2019, 11:51 AM

I think the issue is that you have LCs that all have differing opinions on what the laws mean, and how to use their "discretion". While some like to use a heavy hand, the populous complains cause the last LC team wasnt so harsh, or worse, even within the same term the rules arent the same between LCs. I think discretion needs to be tamed, and a hard line established so the rules apply to everyone equally, and the LC cant pick and choose what to suppress or not.

"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011

One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium

POSITIONS! POSITIONS, EVERYONE!!

Quotes

Divine Owl · 03-08-2019, 12:40 PM

I think it would be extremely hard to keep rules consistent through every LC group, as opinions change over time. I do, however, think that the rules that say it’s up to the LC should be decided on, and enforced equally by each individual Councillor. It may be hard for them to agree, but it’s necessary to reduce confusion among the general public.

AIDENFIEELD

Legislator in TSP | Active User of the RMB | Former Local Councillor | Member of The Ministry Of Regional Affairs

Volaworand · 03-08-2019, 10:09 PM

(03-08-2019, 11:51 AM)Rebeltopia Wrote: I think the issue is that you have LCs that all have differing opinions on what the laws mean, and how to use their "discretion". While some like to use a heavy hand, the populous complains cause the last LC team wasnt so harsh, or worse, even within the same term the rules arent the same between LCs. I think discretion needs to be tamed, and a hard line established so the rules apply to everyone equally, and the LC cant pick and choose what to suppress or not.

Or did the last Local Council simply give up moderating the RMB for fear of being declared corrupt?

The court ruling has ensured that allowing the LC to use their judgement to NOT suppress a post is then going to later be used as evidence that a later suppression was corrupt. So as much as I hate to do so, the courts have tied the hands of me as a Local Councilor and forced this level of stringent enforcement. Are we apparently not allowed to pick and choose? How should any LC determine what is spam at this point?

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

Poppy · 03-09-2019, 01:56 AM

Also this is an unrelated and not very important point, it's not the end of the world type thing at all, just a little annoyance. I don't see the purpose of banning double posting, I never heard anyone complain about seeing a double post, also members of the current LC double post by accident. This isn't an accusation at all, obviously it's hard not to sometimes, but I think the fact that the current LC is struggling to not double post themselves and have to delete their own double posts occasionally is evidence that it's a normal thing that everybody can accidentally do. That being said, I think it is better to allow double posting cause it's a mild, and admittedly only mild annoyance, to not do it and to have to clean up when you accidentally do it, and I don't think it's an annoyance at all to see one since you probably wouldn't notice it at all if you weren't already looking for it, or used to looking for it.

For that reason I believe a mild annoyance is greater than practically no annoyance and thus double posting should be unbanned. You can see it's more of an annoyance to not double post than it is to witness the atrocity of seeing a double post because there wasn't complaining when double posting was allowed and only triple+ was banned, but now there has been mild, though admittedly only mild, complaining now that it is banned, thus it is a greater annoyance to ban it, then it is not to.

Anyway, not much of a problem, but a minor and very easily avoidable one, cherrio! ^~^

Nation: 073 039 109 032 080 111 112 112 121
I'm more active gameside than here but either place I'd love to talk ^-^

(This post was last modified: 03-09-2019, 01:58 AM by Poppy.)

New Haudenosaunee Confederacy · 03-09-2019, 08:14 AM

(03-08-2019, 10:09 PM)Volaworand Wrote: Or did the last Local Council simply give up moderating the RMB for fear of being declared corrupt?

The court ruling has ensured that allowing the LC to use their judgement to NOT suppress a post is then going to later be used as evidence that a later suppression was corrupt. So as much as I hate to do so, the courts have tied the hands of me as a Local Councilor and forced this level of stringent enforcement. Are we apparently not allowed to pick and choose? How should any LC determine what is spam at this point?

It's not that you can't do that, it's that you can't suppress something because you disagree with it. That's ACTUALLY what happened to Slab.

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

Volaworand · 03-09-2019, 10:30 AM

(03-09-2019, 08:14 AM)New Haudenosaunee Confederacy Wrote:
(03-08-2019, 10:09 PM)Volaworand Wrote: Or did the last Local Council simply give up moderating the RMB for fear of being declared corrupt?

The court ruling has ensured that allowing the LC to use their judgement to NOT suppress a post is then going to later be used as evidence that a later suppression was corrupt. So as much as I hate to do so, the courts have tied the hands of me as a Local Councilor and forced this level of stringent enforcement. Are we apparently not allowed to pick and choose? How should any LC determine what is spam at this point?
It's not that you can't do that, it's that you can't suppress something because you disagree with it. That's ACTUALLY what happened to Slab.

I appreciate and understand your concern. However I would point out that was during the previous LC term under a previous set of RMB guidelines, and has already been litigated.

The current guidelines are an attempt to clarify expectations as set by a new Local Council.

We are looking for feedback on the actual guidelines themselves here: How would you word the changes you desire?

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

Concrete Slab · 03-09-2019, 10:33 AM

(03-09-2019, 08:14 AM)New Haudenosaunee Confederacy Wrote:
(03-08-2019, 10:09 PM)Volaworand Wrote: Or did the last Local Council simply give up moderating the RMB for fear of being declared corrupt?

The court ruling has ensured that allowing the LC to use their judgement to NOT suppress a post is then going to later be used as evidence that a later suppression was corrupt. So as much as I hate to do so, the courts have tied the hands of me as a Local Councilor and forced this level of stringent enforcement. Are we apparently not allowed to pick and choose? How should any LC determine what is spam at this point?
It's not that you can't do that, it's that you can't suppress something because you disagree with it. That's ACTUALLY what happened to Slab.

Yes, but I STILL got elected over you. Huh.

Anyway, that’s not what this is about. What is your feedback?

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