Nat's amicus curiae brief with reference to Volaworand's new claims

May it please the court, Volaworand's claim that Review of the ban on Malayan Singapura (HCRR1801) sets a precedent in this case is incorrect. The judgement of HCRR1801 relates to a ban from the region and uses Article III, Section 3 of the Charter (which applies only to ejection or banning) to require due process, in this case notification of rule violations. The facts of the present case are not similiar, so the findings of HCRR1801 do not apply. Further to this, the burden on Volaworand is not to show that their actions were legal but rather to demonstrate that NHC's comments were, among other requirements, made "with a reckless disregard for [their] factual accuracy" (Criminal Code 1.10). Hence, it does not matter if Volaowrand's actions constitute spam or not, the key is whether NHC was reckless in believing it was spam. Given the large number of spam definitions which fit or somewhat fit NHC's definition, I do not believe this threshold of recklessness has been met. As such, if the court agrees that the charges are unlikely to be true (a lack of probable cause), the case should be dismissed (Judicial Act 5.1).

I am citing the judgement as setting forth requirements on Local Council warnings that I as a local councilor am required to provide such warnings.  The court did not specify the method of such written warnings.  NHC's subjective belief that such warnings constituted spam is not a legal standard. 

I remind the court that none of the telegrams I sent were identical, meaningless or unnecessary and so do not fit the definition of spam that even HNC himself has submitted in his defense.  Even as little as 2 hours ago NHC himself made the following public statements:

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34706503

It's not repetitive because it's not the same thing twice.
www.google.com/search?q=define+repetition

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34706876

If they're not the same post then it's not repetition, what is confusing about that?

What was at issue is his public misrepresentation of my communication which resulted in defamation.  Clearly NHC understands that my telegrams were not spam.  However he knowingly defamed me by repeatedly publicly misrepresenting that I spammed him and he made these statements with a reckless disregard for the factual accuracy of those statements.

I await the Courts finding of justicabilty on this case.

---

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

---

Reply

What was at issue is his public misrepresentation of my communication which resulted in defamation.  Clearly NHC understands that my telegrams were not spam.  However he knowingly defamed me by repeatedly publicly misrepresenting that I spammed him and he made these statements with a reckless disregard for the factual accuracy of those statements.

You are taking my posts out of context. These were not about the telegrams and were actually about double posting. Even then, the posts do not apply to your telegrams in the way that your telegrams were all conveying the same message. If one were to send someone else 3 telegrams saying "You're awesome", "You're my senpai", and "I love you" then those are obviously repetitive. The same would apply to your telegrams. You are essentially saying "I suppressed this", "I suppressed this", and "I suppressed this".

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

Reply

If it please the court I would like to submit the following conversation I had with NHC today on the RMB. By his own admission his definition for spam is to be messaged repetitively. He purposefully chose to continue to "Double Post" and violate the RMB Rules and Etiquette policy and decided that the Warning he was received by a duly elected LC member after each violation as spam.

As I explain in this conversation, double posting is not repetition, unless both posts are basically the same thing. The question he gives me with the scenario also doesn't remotely equate to the situation, as I also explain in this conversation.

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

Reply

If it please the court I would like to submit the following conversation I had with NHC today on the RMB. By his own admission his definition for spam is to be messaged repetitively. He purposefully chose to continue to "Double Post" and violate the RMB Rules and Etiquette policy and decided that the Warning he was received by a duly elected LC member after each violation as spam.

As I explain in this conversation, double posting is not repetition, unless both posts are basically the same thing. The question he gives me with the scenario also doesn't remotely equate to the situation, as I also explain in this conversation. 

I explained to NHC multiple times the definition of double post using both the RMB stated definition and the Urban Dictionary definition.  He chose to disregard those definitions each time and instead attempt to focus solely on repetition.  

He has shown and still shows by his admission here that he is above defined rules.  If we are to allow members to define their own rules as NHC is doing with double posting or as Nat is attempting to explain then I ask the court why we have any oversight of the RMB at all?

Reply

What was at issue is his public misrepresentation of my communication which resulted in defamation.  Clearly NHC understands that my telegrams were not spam.  However he knowingly defamed me by repeatedly publicly misrepresenting that I spammed him and he made these statements with a reckless disregard for the factual accuracy of those statements.

You are taking my posts out of context. These were not about the telegrams and were actually about double posting. Even then, the posts do not apply to your telegrams in the way that your telegrams were all conveying the same message. If one were to send someone else 3 telegrams saying "You're awesome", "You're my senpai", and "I love you" then those are obviously repetitive. The same would apply to your telegrams. You are essentially saying "I suppressed this", "I suppressed this", and "I suppressed this". 

NHC I assume you are addressing that to me directly?  If it please the court I point out that I have already provided the Court with the telegrams I sent.  There is no need to speak in hypothetical "what ifs".  My previous post include the text of the telegrams I sent to NHC. Would the court care to ask NHC to fill in his side of the actual conversation?  

I trust the Court can determine the justicability of my charge that NHC's quoted public statements constitute defamation.

---

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

---

Reply

I draw the courts attention to the following post made by NHC today.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34715726

I believe you are corrupt for recommending I get banned from the region, and evil for that and a lot of other things (both IC and OOC).

I continue to patiently endure this defamation while I await the Courts determination of justicability.

---

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

---

Reply

I draw the courts attention to the following post made by NHC today.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34715726

I believe you are corrupt for recommending I get banned from the region, and evil for that and a lot of other things (both IC and OOC).

I continue to patiently endure this defamation while I await the Courts determination of justicability.

If you try to get somebody banned from the region for disagreeing with you then that's obviously corruption. Being evil is without a doubt a matter of opinion though.

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

Reply

I draw the courts attention to the following post made by NHC today.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34715726

I believe you are corrupt for recommending I get banned from the region, and evil for that and a lot of other things (both IC and OOC).

I continue to patiently endure this defamation while I await the Courts determination of justicability. 

If you try to get somebody banned from the region for disagreeing with you then that's obviously corruption. Being evil is without a doubt a matter of opinion though. 

If it please the court I will reply directly to the defendants question.

NHC I am not trying to get you banned from the region for disagreeing with me.  The potential consequences for your rule-breaking is not the subject of this case.  My complaint is about your defamation of me.

I patiently await the courts determination of justicability of this case

---

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

---

Reply

The potential consequences for your rule-breaking is not the subject of this case. My complaint is about your defamation of me.

You know it's only defamation if it's false, right? The entirety of that post is a complete opinion, in fact.

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

Reply

I draw the courts attention to the following post made by NHC today.

https://www.nationstates.net/page=rmb/postid=34715726

I believe you are corrupt for recommending I get banned from the region, and evil for that and a lot of other things (both IC and OOC).

I continue to patiently endure this defamation while I await the Courts determination of justicability.

If you try to get somebody banned from the region for disagreeing with you then that's obviously corruption. Being evil is without a doubt a matter of opinion though.

As one of the recipients of the Border Control action request, it was clear to me that it was not because you disagreed with Volaworand that was the issue, but the manner of your disagreement. There are ways to disagree that do not require rule-breaking and disruption, but you do not appear to have chosen that path.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

Reply